Another tome ruined for Named Chars

[Kaleun]

@WoollyMammoth

I see your point there. If you take Morathi she should be the general and not be second to some generic Hag queen just for some better bonus. However Morathis Command Ability is pretty strong and suits the army well. I guess the whole discussion will solve itself when we see how the Daughters of Khaine are being played.

In general my oppinion is that named characters should be a complete package without options. They are completly unique and the player should profit from their presence while having generic characters as potent option besides named characters.

For me personally (also during my warhammer career) generic characters are super fun. You can think stories around them or build your army around them. With the traits and artefacts you can also manage your army to be more competitive against high tier enemies or make your army weaker against lower tier opponents.

If you would have options on Morathi you could indeed just call her "supreme druchii sorceress" and convert her to Fulgrim... Still works but you have to admit she got hell of a lot more flavor beeing unique. (guess Morathi would agree here )

 

[Marc Wilson]

I’m a bit surprised GW let you on the play test panel when you vent like this. Maybe they’ll take your advance copy away now. Sorry to hear your gaming experiences have been so bad.

[Spiny Norman]

I'm really far from agreeing to this nonsense.

11 hours ago, WoollyMammoth said:

@Kaleun
I just explained why. There is almost no reason to not make someone else general to give Morathi a 5++ which she badly needs for mortal wound protection.

 

Badly? Doesn't she come with the most hubristic survivability item, yet?

[Frozenbeast]

9 hours ago, WoollyMammoth said:

I know durthu is 'a durthu', that's what i said. the point was he was written as a named char. When AoS came out his rules were written to be a named char. Hence the insane 6 damage sword. Then the Sylvaneth book decided to not make him a named char without changing his scroll. My point is, there is no rhyme or reason to what is named and what is not named. They could suddenly change Alarielle to "a sylvaneth queen" tomorrow and then she can take artifacts and command. But, if your favorite models are named, you are screwed out of any command. 

mmmh....Durthu dies in End Times so there is no chance GW wanted him as a named character. The fact they named him Durthu when AOS got released might have been a mistake and the fact Sylvaneth book came out shortly after and ruled this thing out is indicative of GW never wanted to make him a named character.

Sorry to be pedantic and believe me I totally get your point but to agree with you you have to make better points. So far what I always saw is that the rule that avoid named Char to take artifacts and traits has always been followed and for a veeery good reason and I agree with that.

[Frozenbeast]

9 hours ago, WoollyMammoth said:

I know durthu is 'a durthu', that's what i said. the point was he was written as a named char. When AoS came out his rules were written to be a named char. Hence the insane 6 damage sword. Then the Sylvaneth book decided to not make him a named char without changing his scroll. My point is, there is no rhyme or reason to what is named and what is not named. They could suddenly change Alarielle to "a sylvaneth queen" tomorrow and then she can take artifacts and command. But, if your favorite models are named, you are screwed out of any command. 

mmmh....Durthu dies in End Times so there is no chance GW wanted him as a named character. The fact they named him Durthu when AOS got released might have been a mistake and the fact Sylvaneth book came out shortly after and ruled this thing out is indicative of GW never wanted to make him a named character.

Sorry to be pedantic and believe me I totally get your point but to agree with you you have to make better points. So far what I always saw is that the rule that avoid named Char to take artifacts and traits has always been followed and for a veeery good reason and I agree with that.

[Frozenbeast]

38 minutes ago, Spiny Norman said:

I'm really far from agreeing to this nonsense.

12 hours ago, WoollyMammoth said:

@Kaleun
I just explained why. There is almost no reason to not make someone else general to give Morathi a 5++ which she badly needs for mortal wound protection.

 

Badly? Doesn't she come with the most hubristic survivability item, yet?

completely agree. It seems like you were expecting an immortal army center piece just because she supposed to be your ever-general

[Killax]

15 hours ago, WoollyMammoth said:

Doesn't that seem really dumb? Like really, really dumb??  The rules are so much better when you don't make the factions god the general, and instead make some lowly hero  tell Morathi what to do?

Its all centered around the completely arbitrary  Named Char restrictions. If Morahthi could simply take the Command traits, you could field her as the general and have the key 5++ (or -1 to hit in shooting) centered around her, which makes more sense from a lore perspective, a gameplay perspective and a just plain common sense perspective.

Seriously, enough is enough. Remove the Named Char restrictions, at least on command traits (legendary leaders make bad commanders?) so we don't have to play the rules bass akwards to get the most out of the rules.

As the Daughters of Khaine are a splinter-faction of Shadow Aelves that exclusively work towards the will of Morathi/aim to ressurrect Khaine this isn't really dumb. It's a narrative idea fleshed out.
In addition to that I would say that the Cauldron of Blood is always a FANTASTIC general choice even with the inclusion of Morathi because Morathi will lose her Command Ability at some point during the game and if opponents ignore her you as a Daughters of Khaine player should force her in such a position that she can't be ignored.

Daughters of Khaine more than anything is centered around their War Engines. If anything Morathi is a great choice the moment you play mono Daughters of Khaine and want a hammer that isn't an additional beatstick. The reason why this remains a great consideration is actual hobby reasons (the model is awesome) and costs (the model is cheaper as 30 additional Witch Aelves). 

Do I think it would be cool to have Named Characters obtain acces to Command Traits? Maby. But the prime reason why AoS isn't designed like that is because AoS has a ton of Command Traits that are very powerful and would severly skew the choices towards Named Characters.
The interesting thing is that you are of the opinion that currently Maggotkin of Nurgle, Legions of Nagash and Daughters of Khaine force you to thake a specific Named Character X. 
I am of the opinion that the moment you would allow these Named Characters to obtain acces to Command Traits this would be true, whilst now it's most certainly not true because not thaking a Named Character general means you can 'upgrade' your non-named general.

To confirm my opinion on this:  
- Yes I think that if The Glottkin would have acces to Command Traits it would be the best general choice in Maggotkin of Nurgle, whilst now it's not always the best choice.
- Yes I think that if Nagash and the Mortarchs would have acces to Command Traits they would be the best general choices in Legions of Nagash, whilst now they are not always.
- Yes I think that if Morathi would have acces to Command Traits it would be the best general choice in Daughters of Khaine, whilst now it's not always the best choice.
- Yes I think that if Kairos would have acces to Command Traits it would be the best general choice in Desciples of Tzeentch, whilst now it's not always the best choice.
- Yes I think that if Kroak would have acces to.... etc.

Because of the above examples (and I could list a dozen) I believe your standpoint on this isn't well thought trough enough @WoollyMammoth.

The moment Command Traits would be available to Named Characters then a lot of Battletome's would be ruined by Named Characters...
 

[DantePQ]

With DoK it's perfectly fine for Morathi to use some Slaughter Queen as proxy. It suits her lorewise. 

Also I won't use Morathi as general unless I have to as her CA is great but works only in one form.

[tolstedt]

2 hours ago, Spiny Norman said:

Badly? Doesn't she come with the most hubristic survivability item, yet?

Takes four turns to kill no matter what (unless slain by an effect or total carnage).  So good.

[Payce]

36 minutes ago, tolstedt said:

Takes four turns to kill no matter what (unless slain by an effect or total carnage).  So good.

Actually, it doesn't. Put three wounds on High Oracle (one turn) and snake form pops up with six wounds (two more turns). People are far too hung up on the iron heart to realise that Morathi has massive design flaws.

[DantePQ]

16 minutes ago, Payce said:

Actually, it doesn't. Put three wounds on High Oracle (one turn) and snake form pops up with six wounds (two more turns). People are far too hung up on the iron heart to realise that Morathi has massive design flaws.

I think her design is perfectly fine, she is powerful model but you got to use her carefully. In right cult with 5++ save or -1 to hit with shooting you should keep her safe. What's more I like her best as no general as her biggest drawback is lack of CA in monster form (and it could be triggered randomly even in turn 2). She's great because worst case scenario she will survive 3 turn and in right cult she isn't that easy to kill that fast, also even with 6 wounds left she hits like a truck. 

[Harioch]

36 minutes ago, Payce said:

Actually, it doesn't. Put three wounds on High Oracle (one turn) and snake form pops up with six wounds (two more turns). People are far too hung up on the iron heart to realise that Morathi has massive design flaws.

As I don't like the double-damage thing I'm agreeing with you.

In my mind it wouldn't have been too powerfull if she just kept the damage done to her before hulking out. The fact that you can't heal her adds to the cons.

Buuuut it could also explain why she is cheaper than Alarielle and alike. Plus they made it so that Morathi will always have some killy potential even when she comes snake-form half life (she "only" loses 2 attacks, damage of flat 6 to D6 and 2 inches move ). And that's without all the boons she gets with Cults and Allegiance during the game.

So it may not bae  huge issue after all. I know I will play her because I love the character since WHB and she seems interresting to play but yeah I would have prefered that the double-damage wasn't a thing (and I can't tell yet if she's that powerful or not for her point cost).

[Killax]

17 minutes ago, Harioch said:

I know I will play her because I love the character since WHB and she seems interresting to play but yeah I would have prefered that the double-damage wasn't a thing (and I can't tell yet if she's that powerful or not for her point cost).

My vision on it is very simple still.
1. Don't make her the general.
2. Treat her very much like a Greater Daemon/beatstick hammer.

Quite frankly I really like her small size also but would almost always turn into big Morathi by turn 2. With the prime reason of not instantly doing it if you can hide her turn 1.
In terms of narrative I also think that small Morathi is largely only there because of that. She doesn't want to display her form to everybody instantly. Only when the battle occurs she can change because then the focus usually isn't on her well being.

480 points is quite a lot but I think she is worth it based on the premise of attrition. One of the issues Skarbrand has for example is that whilst he is 400 points of massive offense any good army with some form of mobile elite with Mortal Wounds can delete him in a turn. Tis can't occur with Morathi and because of that the best line of battle is to feed her chaff which in turn has issues wounding her when you give her Arcane Shield. 

In addition if I read it correctly she can also instantly deal with the unit Champion/Icon bearer right? This in turn makes her destroy chaff really well and for 480 points she should be able to at least eat through two units of chaff. Meanwhile Witches are amazing against elites with a ton of Mortal Wounds and a 'ward save'. They are able to delete pretty much anything that also doesn't have a ward save and or tons and tons of attacks.

A lot of DoK plays akin to Khorne, which is very cool. 

[Bradifer]

Within 5 minutes of reading the Legions of Nagash battle tome, I figured out that most of the LoN factions really want you to bring a cool named thematically on-point mortarch.

How cool! Then i realized it forces you to take the Mortarch of its choosing, and forces you not to take any of the 12 cool command traits or artefacts I just sat there and read.

It went down like this:

Step 1: Be excited, read all about new command traits and artefacts the balance team spent (months?) putting together.

Step 2: Immediately realize that GW designed it so that you are unlikely to ever use the things I just got excited about, because I have to use specific named characters and they have to be the general. (in some lists).

Step 3: Skip to long awaited Death battalions and laugh at how bad all but 1 of them are.

 

I completely agree this named character thing is nonsense. It's confusing for a new player to get excited about a fun way to buff their favorite named hero, then just suddenly "No, you can't, idiot." when they realize GW is essentially nerfing every named character forever until they feel like changing it.

10 hours ago, Malfunct Bot said:

I'd rather not have to face an Alarielle with a 2+ saves ignoring -1 rend thank you very much.

This is a problem with Sylvaneth, not with named characters. The issue is that Sylvaneth has incredibly good and passive buffs in the form of their command traits and artefacts. They require no decision making or positioning, just "whelp I'm worth more points now."

@WoollyMammoth While I don't think it's ruining the game, it's certainly a dissapointment and it feels really clunky and stupid. LoN Death battletome technically was a buff for me as a death player, but man did they sure figure out a bunch of ways not to excite me at all. Pretty much rolled my eyes as I figured out how half of it restricts the usage of the named characters they are trying to force. As somebody with a well painted Mortarch I want to use, it already feels like Arkhan is the only choice and the command traits I've already deleted from my mind. Nice book.

 

You know what's fun? Making a powerful army that you customized to be the best it can be.

What's not fun?  Reading through a huge list of fun things you cannot use because the character was deemed too powerful already, when it reality, those named characters are usually overshadowed by generic heroes. Promote the named characters, don't give reasons not to take them.

[Harioch]

@Killax Yeah nothing I can really add to your post since I agree on every parts 

I, too, prefer human Morathi because the magic and command thing is more my playstyle for a general. And that's maybe the sad part is she can't use her CA while in Medusa-mode. There your comparison with Skarbrand is really on spot ! I think transforming her earlier or later will depends heavily on the list she faces but at some point she must always do it.

I agree that they share the synergy playstyle of Blades of Khorne but I feel that DoK aren't as one dimentional as Khorne (or the way I see them at least) in the tools at their disposal.

[BunkhouseBuster]

Back in the day, up through 5th Edition 40K, I remember when named characters were not allowed at tournaments and required your opponent's permission to even field.  Unless it was a what-if scenario battle or recreation of one from the stories, named characters were pretty much a special treat in games.  Granted, this is clearly not the case any more, but I wonder if there is still some of that mindset in the GW design studio, where the big named characters are there for special occasions and not necessarily for every game.

To me, I hardly ever use named characters.  Like, the only time I ever did was taking Commissar Yarrick in a doubles-tournament when my brother brought Ghazgul Thracka Ork army (back when Allies of Convenience was a thing ).  Otherwise, I try to avoid using named characters in my regular games.  Not that I am critical of those who do use them, but to me, they are a "special occasion" model that requires a better paint job and a battle worthy of their presence, and those are usually pre-planned Narrative games, not tournament matches.

Frankliy, GW could remove the "may only be taken once" limitation from the Matched Play rules and let everyone bring however many of the models they want.  I mean, wouldn't they want to sell more than one of that particular to someone playing that army?  That's why I like how they handled the Maw-crusha kit - can make Gordrakk or the generic version of the character from the same kit!

Remember folks, Narrative Play is not the exact same as Matched Play, and Matched Play doesn't always mean tournament play.

[zedatkinszed]

24 minutes ago, BunkhouseBuster said:

Remember folks, Narrative Play is not the exact same as Matched Play, and Matched Play doesn't always mean tournament play.

Have to agree with this - well said!

[GammaMage]

This is true! At the hobby shop I work at we use matched play rules, but not competitively. I know it sounds odd, but it works, cause we can play (mostly)  balanced games just by setting a point value and asking 'Is it ok if I play Nagash?' (Or the Glottkin whatever other big monster the opponent might concievably struggle against.)

Comparing the power level of Morathi and Skarbrand is relevant, cause he sees a bunch of play here.

[Killax]

2 hours ago, Harioch said:

I agree that they share the synergy playstyle of Blades of Khorne but I feel that DoK aren't as one dimentional as Khorne (or the way I see them at least) in the tools at their disposal.

That's absolutely true also, though with the smaller line and fewer Battalions it can lead to one ideal build earlier. Having said that adding deep strike options and ranged attacks most certainly give DoK more depth as killing stuff in melee.

Really those that are of the opinion that Legions of Nagash are so Mortarch and Nagash focused really are fooling themselves also. But it's a completely different debate altogether. Within LoN Arkhan is awesome, Nagash leads to a new subgame and the other named characters are extremely optional. Within MoN much the same is true also. If you pick Glottkin your whole build needs to focus around them, Gutrot is just awesome...

Here Morathi is just awesome, as unlike the rest of the units in DoK her attrition option/good survivability is not bound to their War Engines. Which in turn means she's a terrific Hero to thake with this otherwise small tactical handicap in mind. If anything she can be amongst the first strikers, very capable to punish one specific unit where needed.

Whilst I'm okay with the idea that Named Characters should have some acces to Command Traits I completely disagree with idea that because it doesn't work that way the game is ruined. It really couldn't be more from the truth. 

By WFB comparison AoS' Named characters are exactly where they should be, they are an option and not a mandatory pick. In 40k most Named characters severely outmatch their regular counterparts. It's not better/cooler that way. It just filters more good picks. 

[Sleboda]

15 hours ago, Kamose said:

.Named characters represent individuals from the lore with very specific weapons and personalities.  This is why they can't be customized.  They are characters from the background, from the Narrative. 

This.

[ledha]

10 hours ago, Spiny Norman said:

I'm really far from agreeing to this nonsense.

 

Badly? Doesn't she come with the most hubristic survivability item, yet?

fun thing : since it seems she can't be ALLOCATED more than 3 wounds, you should be able to use this invulnerable save to ignore those allocated wounds

[DantePQ]

Until it gets FAQed soon 

[rokapoke]

Better headline: Another release sullied by preemptive whining. Seriously, let’s give rules/models/factions a chance before tearing GW a new one for having the audacity to continue supporting their game with exciting new product lines!

[PlasticCraic]

1 hour ago, rokapoke said:

Better headline: Another release sullied by preemptive whining. Seriously, let’s give rules/models/factions a chance before tearing GW a new one for having the audacity to continue supporting their game with exciting new product lines!

This has sullied nothing for me, it's given me a good laugh 

Everything I've read gets me more and more pumped for what seems to be a really intriguing release.

[Galas]

So Named Characters that are extremely powerfull and with a ton of special and unique habilities can't have bonuses that are intended to use to customize generic characters?

 

Hmmm... who could that be? Do you want W40K where theres really 0 reason to take generic characters as your warlords because named ones are just flat out better 90% of the time?

And... shouldn't be the title of the thread "Another Battletome ruined FOR named chars"?