Jump to content

Wanderers of the Realms: A TGA Community Living Wishlist


Yeled

Recommended Posts

Might be too restrictive, yeah... Maybe they could have something like the Kurnoth Hunters' rule "Tanglethorn Thicket": pile in 1", and do it in the movement phase if the unit did not retreat or run . Forget about the scenery suggestion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 221
  • Created
  • Last Reply
On 9/21/2017 at 10:10 PM, Yeled said:

Spellweaver draft write up. Please comment, critique, make suggestions...

 

Spellweaver. Our Wizard is a fairly nice hero unit, and at 80 pts she's one of the few Wanderer troops that don't feel overpriced. She's nothing spectacular, but her ability to automatically unbind one spell a game is nice. Theoretically the best thing about the Spellweaver is the ability to cast a magic that revives Wanderers. Her spell is thematic and for the most part useful, though at times it feels a bit underpowered.  The problem is that it hardly ever pays to use the ability on a non-cavalry unit, unless you're trying to bump Glade Guard above the 20 model 3+ to hit threshold. In a war of attrition reviving D3 1 wound models is never really as good as a simple mystic shield unless you're totally out of danger (which is almost never). So while the TGA Community feels the Spellweaver should mostly remain as is, we have two suggestions regarding her spell that would make her slightly more appealing and versatile in games (and maybe worth 100 pts instead of 80...we're willing to pay for good units):

  • Consider allowing the Spellweaver's unique spell to revive D6 wounds of models, rounding up. This would mean that when the spell is cast on 1 wound models we would revive D6 models, whereas on 2 wound cavalry it would revive D3 models. Since we have no 3 wound models anything higher is a non-issue.
  • Consider allowing the Spellweaver's unique spell to revive Aelves rather than only Wanderers. That simple change would make her an excellent ally in other Aelf armies or an integral part of a mixed order army. For Wanderer allegiance armies, it would mean we could have Aelven allies who could benefit from her magic, making our faction more flexible.

If people are ok with the spellweaver write up I'll post it to the front page. It's based on an earlier conversation, but I'm hesitant to move it without comment. Let me know if folks are ok with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WABBIT said:

Give her a horse or an option to ride one for more points and a wound extra. :)

 

EDIT or an Eagle or a Dragon! or a floating bit of terrain which glade guard can use as a platform to shoot people from without fear of getting into combat  :D

Someone sounds salty about the Balewind Vortex. ;)

As for the rest, I agree with it in theory. But I think we should save it for the New Units section of this discussion. A mounted Spellweaver would require a "new" model, and it's my hope that GW could incorporate bits and pieces of our wishlist into currently available units by simply adjusting warscrolls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Yeled said:

Someone sounds salty about the Balewind Vortex. ;)

As for the rest, I agree with it in theory. But I think we should save it for the New Units section of this discussion. A mounted Spellweaver would require a "new" model, and it's my hope that GW could incorporate bits and pieces of our wishlist into currently available units by simply adjusting warscrolls.

I have 3 mounted spell weavers but yeah I know what you mean. There is a war scroll for mounted spell weaver so I will just use that for now.

Not bothered about the balewind vortex. Just wanted my mounted spell weaver back or something better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I added the Spellweaver to the first post. New text is in blue. That finishes up the existing and currently supported units, though I'm happy to keep working on them and updating them with new ideas.

Next I think we should start discussing potential new units. I'm a little afraid of this exercise as it has the potential to wander just about everywhere, from bringing back compendium units to completely new units, heroes, wizards, and behemoths. Maybe the best thing is to think about what we would like to see in the hypothetical situation that GW introduces a Battletome and gives us 4-6 additional unit/hero types. I think there's probably two ways to think about this: 1) what is missing from our army strategically and 2) how would we want to see the Wanderers evolve in this new thing that is AoS?

Maybe we just brainstorm for a while without trying to create any rules. I think this might take a while, and I don't want to start writing unit descriptions before we've really thought of this. We probably should think in terms of broad archetypes: A monster that does X or a hero who buffs Y...that kind of thing. Though if people have really clever ideas that are specific I'd love to hear them. Maybe once we've had a chance to discuss this for a while we can list some ideas in the first post and leave it at that. I don't want an endless list of concepts in that post but on the other hand I don't mind this thread having post after post of them.

If people have other ideas of how to proceed let me know. I'm thinking this will turn into the wild west and that may be ok. But I'll try to keep us moving in some semblance of a common direction.

Ok...go nuts. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/20/2017 at 2:33 PM, WABBIT said:

Yes, i'd pay 100pts for it too.

Agree! Ia would make the hope of having an Aelf faction in the future more appetizing and varied too.

 

On 9/20/2017 at 2:33 PM, WABBIT said:

Also I was thinking about cavalry, 5 is too few (Easy to shoot off or kill off before return attacks) and 10 is too many (Base sizes and short ranges on combat weapons mean they rarely get to all attack - no second rank attacks). I prefer previous editions where we could pay per single model, that gave us so much more flexibility and allowed us to spend those left over points of 20 - 60 on something. I know GW wont go back to single model points but it would be a nice option for those of us who don't have full unit sizes. Cavalry often come in 8's in the old game and 8 is a good number for cav in AoS.  The new box sets are 5 though. Having 10 is ok for redundancy but battle shock is very scary for multi wound units like Cavalry and they don't have the punch or resilience to justify using them (unless your Storm Cast).

I think the magic part of SotT is already pretty balanced with the fact, ass mentioned, they can cast the spell on all Order units. What I would like to see is either a bit more hitting power in CC, which though would bring them out of the "support" role in my opinion and being not resilient already would maybe make no sense, or something more punchy in the shooting phase like an increase in range making them useful with all the allegiance ability shenanigans seen they will have to stay 9" away from the enemy; i can see them having a bit more poking power considering the -1 rend they have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Frozenbeast said:

Agree! Ia would make the hope of having an Aelf faction in the future more appetizing and varied too.

 

I think the magic part of SotT is already pretty balanced with the fact, ass mentioned, they can cast the spell on all Order units. What I would like to see is either a bit more hitting power in CC, which though would bring them out of the "support" role in my opinion and being not resilient already would maybe make no sense, or something more punchy in the shooting phase like an increase in range making them useful with all the allegiance ability shenanigans seen they will have to stay 9" away from the enemy; i can see them having a bit more poking power considering the -1 rend they have.

Take a look at the entries for SotT and the Spellweaver in the first post and see what you think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/23/2017 at 3:55 PM, Yeled said:

If people are ok with the spellweaver write up I'll post it to the front page. It's based on an earlier conversation, but I'm hesitant to move it without comment. Let me know if folks are ok with it.

The Spellweaver text is very fine to me! I do feel like it needs a mounted model too, but I would indeed make it a new unit (on a FREAKING eagle <3 )

As for the new units... :D I'll try to give it a go:

- Eagle "heavy" cavalry. When I say "heavy", I mean "beefy" . Kind of a flying version of the Wild Riders. One could argue we already have such a unit (Wild Riders), but... EAGLES!

- Eagle light cavalry, like the ones we used to have. I would in fact make them replace our old Glade Riders.

- Waywatchers, like the ones we had in the compendium. Badass elite archers

- Close combat version of the Waywatchers. Like some sort of elite commando springing deadly ambushes (working in pairs with the shooty Waywatchers). To me they could well be our Wildwood Rangers... 

That is all I have so far.

I'm curious about a Behemoth suggestion though...

EDIT: since Wanderers are nomadic, why not some kind of big creature carrying a bunch of archers? (like the Stegadon)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a Behemoth I would like to see a creature that blends well with both the Wanderers lore and the Age of Sigmar realmworlds - something new in concept.  The Wanderers are closely connected to Ley Lines and create Waystones to strengthen them.  Perhaps there is a creature that has some symbiotic relationship with the Ley Lines. It lives below ground travelling out of phase with reality, but when it emerges becomes solid.  What the actual stats for such a creature would be I'm not too sure, but it would be nice if it had the ability to move unseen below ground and surface to attack.  Wouldn't wanted it to be mounted by a hero, but could be summoned by a Shaman-like hero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sylvaneth stole the wyld woods from us so what about Floating terrain for wanderers? It's roots could attack those it moves over?  Water falls put out fires or drown people? :POk a bit avatar I know but I still love the idea.  It would be an awesome new model and terrain peice from GW and encourage lots of creative pieces built from scratch.

I ilke the Ley lines idea, is it referred to much in AoS lord? I haven't read any books or stories on AoS as I'm not a huge SCE or chaos fan. Story wise It's all a big muddle to me. 

Wanderers surfing rainbows that what we want ?Asgardian bifrost style.

Aggressive Triffid like plant life that strangles and devours those who oppose wanderers?

ok I'll stop writing down all the random stuff popping into my head now. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Pigey said:

The Spellweaver text is very fine to me! I do feel like it needs a mounted model too, but I would indeed make it a new unit (on a FREAKING eagle <3 )

As for the new units... :D I'll try to give it a go:

- Eagle "heavy" cavalry. When I say "heavy", I mean "beefy" . Kind of a flying version of the Wild Riders. One could argue we already have such a unit (Wild Riders), but... EAGLES!

- Eagle light cavalry, like the ones we used to have. I would in fact make them replace our old Glade Riders.

- Waywatchers, like the ones we had in the compendium. Badass elite archers

- Close combat version of the Waywatchers. Like some sort of elite commando springing deadly ambushes (working in pairs with the shooty Waywatchers). To me they could well be our Wildwood Rangers... 

That is all I have so far.

I'm curious about a Behemoth suggestion though...

EDIT: since Wanderers are nomadic, why not some kind of big creature carrying a bunch of archers? (like the Stegadon)

I think swift hawk agents will steal all the wanderer eagles and war hawks. I think they should just merge wanderers and swifthawks anyway. It would make list building easier and maybe give us some more synergies that all aelf armies lack right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, WABBIT said:

I think swift hawk agents will steal all the wanderer eagles and war hawks. I think they should just merge wanderers and swifthawks anyway. It would make list building easier and maybe give us some more synergies that all aelf armies lack right now.

That would indeed be nice. I already thought of a big conversion project: use a Dark Eldar ship and make it one big flying ship for Swifthawk Agents pulled by two eagles (you never have enough eagles). I could see such a ship in a Wanderers army. Some sort of means of transportation using the Ley Lines... That would be a nice behemoth (if not for Wanderers, for Swifthawk Agents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I mentioned in the Let's Chat Wanderers thread, I just purchased a Frostheart Phoenix.  The more I think about what I'd like to see in our army, the more I realize just how much I appreciate the idea of making it harder to hit our troops. If we're going to have low armor, make us quick and difficult to hit the way high WS and initiative used to do in WFB. 

So I don't want to just copy the Frostheart, but the Waywatcher's command ability that makes us harder to hit in the shooting phase combined with other abilities that lower the ability to wound or hit could be something of a theme for the Wanderers. It would also help our 1 wound models deal with MWs better. I'm not sure what that looks like, exactly, but a skirmishing army could really benefit from the idea that we can hit you better than you can hit us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we feel this thread has run its course? Or do we want to continue brainstorming potential new units to add to the first post? I ask because at some point I want to find a way to get this into the hands of a GW employee. I'm not content to let it sit and hope they see it. I suspect there are forumites on this site that have direct contact, and maybe we can solicit them to point it out to someone. But I only want to do that when we feel it's ready. Maybe just sticking to existing units is the way to go. Maybe new units is too open ended. It seems like we've lost a bit of steam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As tey merged SotW into Wahnderers as such (sisters of Avelorn previously as HE) i will be quite happy if they'd merge wood elves eagles and warhawk into SHA. It will be very thematic and cool and will make another faction maybe palyable. I am personally happy with the suggestions that came out so far and i would just submit everything as it is in the front page (without forgetting to ask for some reinforcement back from the compendium e.g. avatar and wardancers) without pushing futher for merges or such stuff.

I like they decided to move AoS playstyle into something visually thematic so for me let's keep it like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Frozenbeast, I guess getting a new Avatar of the Hunt model, along with awesome dynamic wardancers, both with new rules could be pretty cool, yeah. I also think getting a version of the Waywatchers back would be good, along with a mounted hero. If those things happened with some cool synergies that fit the new Wanderer skirmishing theme, I'd be pretty happy. But I wouldn't want them exactly as they were in the compendium. I would want to see much more clever, synergistic rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think removing the penalty for moving Sisters of the watch and Waywatcher lord are enough to help with the movement theme. Eternal Guard are the only unit that doesn't suit a moving style, they represent more of a rooted tree aspect of nature. We definitely need something like wardancers and Way watchers back again. I think GW will want us to use the Witch Aelves and Sisters of slaughter instead though. 

I used 2 units of 5 waywatchers today vs some Storm Vermin in cover with Mystic shield and found the Piercing arrows incredibly effective against Skaven in general as the 2 Damage means they don't get Shields (only works on damage 1) and the -2 rend on 6's to wound meant I managed to kill quite a few before they broke cover and charged my eternal Guard. Before that I had never used anything but fast shots.

 

Thank you for all the time and effort you have put in on the living Wishlist @Yeled it's much appreciated and admired. Even if nothing changes it's been an interesting discussion which has helped us learn a lot more about Wanderer strengths and weaknesses and how we match up to other armies. It will be a year at least before we see anything filter into the next GHB2018.

As a side note. I think we need to bear in mind GW just don't have enough staff to focus on all the armies out there for AoS and balance them equally. They have many more games to manage now (40k, Shade Spire, Skirmish, Silver tower etc...) which is surely taking even more of the game designers/writers time away from AoS. The more staff they employ to balance armies the more variation we will get in game design opinion so it's so not as simple as just getting more designers in. You lose consistency when 20 people are reviewing and writing rules for the same game where 2 or 3 will generally come to the same consensus. Still you never know one of them may read what you have put together and take a few steps toward making Wanderers more fun to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WABBIT said:

Thank you for all the time and effort you have put in on the living Wishlist @Yeled it's much appreciated and admired. Even if nothing changes it's been an interesting discussion which has helped us learn a lot more about Wanderer strengths and weaknesses and how we match up to other armies. It will be a year at least before we see anything filter into the next GHB2018.

As a side note. I think we need to bear in mind GW just don't have enough staff to focus on all the armies out there for AoS and balance them equally. They have many more games to manage now (40k, Shade Spire, Skirmish, Silver tower etc...) which is surely taking even more of the game designers/writers time away from AoS. The more staff they employ to balance armies the more variation we will get in game design opinion so it's so not as simple as just getting more designers in. You lose consistency when 20 people are reviewing and writing rules for the same game where 2 or 3 will generally come to the same consensus. Still you never know one of them may read what you have put together and take a few steps toward making Wanderers more fun to play.

Hey, I'm happy to do it. Thanks to everyone for helping out. I'm sure it won't amount to much in the way of changes, but it's still worthwhile if only for the exploration of the faction. I've learned a lot thanks to everyone's input and experiences. On the other hand, in the very unlikely event that this makes a difference...well, then it will definitely be worthwhile.

I'm going to try to write up a quick summary of possible new units/old compendium units that might make good additions to the army going forward. I'm not going to devote a ton of space to it as I think it's such an open ended question that we'll be better off concentrating on rules for existing models, but it's still a good idea to jot some ideas down. Maybe just a bullet for the types of troops or abilities we'd like to see. Keep 'em coming if you've got 'em and I'll write something up soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah @Yeled I think the best way to manage this thread is to keep it very high-level and as concise as possible on the front page. The more detailed we get, the less likely people will read through it all. That's why most of my feedback was very general and vague, like "I want this theme and rules like X that support that" instead of stuff like "This new unit should have this statline, this ability and this style model"

Thanks again for all the hard work maintaining this! I'm glad we have a place where we can funnel our frustration into positive feedback/suggestions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Tidings said:

Thanks again for all the hard work maintaining this! I'm glad we have a place where we can funnel our frustration into positive feedback/suggestions.

the more i read this post the more I would like this, shall I call it project, idea, suggestion....thing, to succeed. I totally agree with @Tidings let's keep this tread in the front page as much as we can. I know I have not been much useful for it but when I jumped on the train a lot of ideas were already out and I actually liked them. and a big big thank you for all the work you have been doing.

little off topic; I have been hearing about the troubles T9A (direct opponent to AoS when 8th ended) is going though and the more I hear about it the more I realize how something like AoS in its more simple mechanics is hiding a very big and positive community; a community that has been growing for two years and never heard it being into such crisis like T9A is going through now. As a fist hour skeptic regarding AoS I now find myself enjoying more this "more simple" game with a nice and friendly community then a "more strategic" system with a growing toxic community (the community was toxic in 8th too and all the toxicity has been transferred to T9A).

So thank you guys for keep up our morale with this kind of topics.

that said.....srew GW we want to fire magic arrow that do D3 MW on 4+ at 36" every other turn if our units don't move!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...