Wanderers of the Realms: A TGA Community Living Wishlist

[Yeled]

5 hours ago, Nubgan said:

Without getting their own spell list of some sort I think the Sisters of the Thorn and Spellweavers are decent enough for task. They do magic fine and I think its the other heroes that are the week side of the picture, but I think enough has been suggested to give them a chance competitively if some of it were to be adopted. 

That's my feeling as well. I was just looking at Palladors with my friend who plays stormcast and, well...feeling a little resentful that those high speed monsters are the same cost as SotT. No way those are equivalent units. I don't even know what GW is thinking. But in terms of the Spellweaver, I just don't think she needs much adjusting.

[Aezeal]

On 16-9-2017 at 6:19 PM, Yeled said:

No worries. I think we need to have these kinds of discussions to properly create this wishlist. I've been porting ideas over from the main Wanderers let's chat thread to inform a lot of what is being discussed and written here, too.

I do want to know what you think about whether the ambush/trigger abilities might work as well on the Waystrider, or if you think they are better on the Wayfinder? I asked above but it was between your quotes so you may have missed it.

You could still play those eagles as griffins or phoenices. 

[Frozenbeast]

5 hours ago, Yeled said:

That's my feeling as well. I was just looking at Palladors with my friend who plays stormcast and, well...feeling a little resentful that those high speed monsters are the same cost as SotT. No way those are equivalent units. I don't even know what GW is thinking. But in terms of the Spellweaver, I just don't think she needs much adjusting.

Completely agree. This is why from now on i ll probably not field SotT anymore unless high points battle. I feel like I m paying 220 p.ts for one spell and some space on the battlefield. As per Spellweaver it was very useful (and still is if you play compendium) with multiple wounds model units like hawk raiders although again I found myself paying 80 p.ts for a auto dispel only and some situational shields. it would be good seeing something you werre saying @Yeled: D6  wounds instead of D3 models and at that points i d think of even fielding 2 and i would accept a 20 p.t increase. With this change it would be maybe not so appetizing for like a mixed order but at least in Wanderers or lists with high number of models could be great.

 

[chord]

6 hours ago, Yeled said:

That's my feeling as well. I was just looking at Palladors with my friend who plays stormcast and, well...feeling a little resentful that those high speed monsters are the same cost as SotT. No way those are equivalent units. I don't even know what GW is thinking. But in terms of the Spellweaver, I just don't think she needs much adjusting.

If I had to guess I think the points for the SoT are so high because the spell works on all order units. 

[Yeled]

3 hours ago, chord said:

If I had to guess I think the points for the SoT are so high because the spell works on all order units. 

That's a very astute observation. It sucks that we pay a premium for one of our units because it can be used well with non-Wanderers. Maybe we need to suggest that the points come down but have the spell only work on Aelves or Wanderers. I could add that to the SotT suggestions in the first post if people think that's a good idea.

[chord]

2 hours ago, Yeled said:

That's a very astute observation. It sucks that we pay a premium for one of our units because it can be used well with non-Wanderers. Maybe we need to suggest that the points come down but have the spell only work on Aelves or Wanderers. I could add that to the SotT suggestions in the first post if people think that's a good idea.

Personally I prefer more cross faction abilities/spells to faction only abilities/spells.  

[WABBIT]

I think I agree with @Chord, I'm not sure I like all the allegiance specific abilities floating around. It makes it harder to mix and match grand alliance armies. Its great to have allegiance abilities but if nothing synergises with anything outside its own faction it becomes locked into its own sub faction. I like to mix up units from time to time and build Order faction armies. I get that it may cost more to do so and I think that is unfair on an army that is already quite weak (Wanderers). I'd like to take more sylvaneth but outside of their alleigance they are less efficient but cost the same. Sylvaneth in particular struggle with allies because of the way they are. It would be nice to get a price drop but I like flexibility and choice in list building. Its allows for some very creative armies hobby wise too.

[Yeled]

53 minutes ago, WABBIT said:

I think I agree with @Chord, I'm not sure I like all the allegiance specific abilities floating around. It makes it harder to mix and match grand alliance armies. Its great to have allegiance abilities but if nothing synergises with anything outside its own faction it becomes locked into its own sub faction. I like to mix up units from time to time and build Order faction armies. I get that it may cost more to do so and I think that is unfair on an army that is already quite weak (Wanderers). I'd like to take more sylvaneth but outside of their alleigance they are less efficient but cost the same. Sylvaneth in particular struggle with allies because of the way they are. It would be nice to get a price drop but I like flexibility and choice in list building. Its allows for some very creative armies hobby wise too.

Fair enough. I understand @chord's point. But is the answer to lower their points, keep them as is, or make them powerful enough to make them worth their points? 

[awcamawn]

8 hours ago, chord said:

If I had to guess I think the points for the SoT are so high because the spell works on all order units. 

I agree, their spell makes them a great support unit and a potentially interesting ally option across the Order Grand Alliance, but I think they are still overpriced. Lowering the points would be the quickest fix but ideally I would just like them to be worth those points by being a bit more fierce and elite in either close combat or with their javelins. Either increase their range somewhat and make them slightly deadlier at range, like 14" range, 3s to hit, 4s to wound, or give them close to the same CC profile that Wild Riders have (ie still somewhat underwhelming). I don't want to see Wanderers turned into a horde army so that they're worth their points, I want them to be the elite aelven warriors they should be. 

 

For me, Wanderers should be an army that wants to fight on its own terms and is good at ensuring that it does so, controlling the battlefield so that the enemy is largely forced to fight where and when and how a Wanderer general wants them to. Their weakness, then, should be when an enemy can catch them flat footed and dictate the terms of engagement themselves (then they squish real good and quick, GW has nailed this part). I think GW has done a pretty decent job of establishing this sort of feel to their playstyle, particularly with the new allegiance abilities. Wanderers can give key enemy models a -1 to hit debuff for the rest of a game, they can appear and disappear maddeningly and lead enemies on a merry chase, they can use their fey and tricksy nature to remove a powerful enemy hero from a combat, and they have units that can be challenging to use to their fullest (I mean this in a good way, after a fashion).

Unfortunately with the compendium changes we lost as many cool/fluffy rules as we gained with the new GHB. Some of the things that seem to fit the Wanderer playstyle and 'feel' to the army were lost. The Soporific Breath ability that the Forest Dragon has is really cool and fluffy and I think adds a fun strategic element for both players as to how to position yourself to maximize/minimize the number of units it effects. We got a somewhat similar ability with the Forget-Me-Knot artifact which is awesome, and I think both are perfect examples of ways to give Wanderers ways to control the battlefield, and I would like to see more of this sort of thing if we get any updates. I also really like the Wardancers' cycle of dances to choose from, which is similar in a way to the choice of shot type for Waywatchers/Waywatcher hero. These make the units more flexible and give you a tactical choice to make, and I think it would be cool to see more such modal abilities in GW rules writing in the future. Another thing Wanderers lost was the compendium battalion, which was pretty restrictive and mediocre overall but had a cool rule that fits Wanderers really well - the ability to resist the dangerous effects of scenery rules. 

Great thread guys, sorry if I repeated anything that was already mentioned. I think GW did a good job giving us Allegiance Abilities that really fit the flavor of our army, it's just disappointing to lose some of the fluffiest rules at the same time. Wanderers are one of quite a few armies right now that could really become fully fleshed out with just a small release of a hero and a unit or so. Although we've been told not to expect anything for GHB allegiance armies for a while, I would love to see Shadespire or even Warhammer quest releases used to pad out some of those existing factions that are right on the edge of being a full army.

[WABBIT]

8 hours ago, Yeled said:

Fair enough. I understand @chord's point. But is the answer to lower their points, keep them as is, or make them powerful enough to make them worth their points? 

Lower their points. No one uses them in combat because they are way too fragile for their price to waste. They don't really DO anything beyond cast a spell and offer some close range support from the rear which isn't  effective enough to make a difference. As a result they end up being an over priced mage with a good spell, lot of wounds and high speed.

[Yeled]

1 hour ago, WABBIT said:

Lower their points. No one uses them in combat because they are way too fragile for their price to waste. They don't really DO anything beyond cast a spell and offer some close range support from the rear which isn't  effective enough to make a difference. As a result they end up being an over priced mage with a good spell, lot of wounds and high speed.

That's certainly an option, and I think having them cost 180 points would be ideal, but I wonder if the 200+ point threshold is a magic number for GW and the allies system. It limits allied units to one unit of this type. 

Palladors have a decent ranged profile, a very good close combat profile with the ability to do mortal wounds, and tremendous speed. They outclass the SotT at every level save the magic.

What about increasing SotT's ranged profile, as @awcamawn suggested? A range of 12"-14" on their javelins with a 3+ to hit would make them better in their support role. Alternatively, an additional ability that effects an enemy's movement or buffs something could help them.

[WABBIT]

I think they need their old Ward save back to make them much more resilient, that lessens the need for increasing range but it would still help. Hitting on 3's for elite cav is a must.  Being more resilient really makes them more useful with the Melt away ability too as they may actually survive in enough numbers to be able to shoot back effectively.

Melt away, while very cool as an ability, is planning to fail and none of our shooting units can sustain a round of combat and survive in enough numbers after battle shock to be able to hit back with any impact. It would be great for Hunters with bows! But not for Glade guard with a Goblins statline and 6 save... Even SotW only have 5+ save losing one is double the points and shots too! IF GW are serious about buffing wanderers to something like competitive Wanderers need another ability that plans for success not failure. Archers getting charged is too late.

I think you are right about the 200pt threshold GW seem to be using, they don't want 2 of some units being used as allies just like the Kurnoth hunters. I would love to have 2 units of those one just isn't enough and again its another restriction that lessens my enjoyment of the game. Ironically no one takes 10 sisters of the thorn as they simple are not worth it. Allowing them to cast 2 spells at 10, 3 at 15 would encourage larger units but not much.

Too many restrictions GW!!! please stop it! If you get the points right you don't need to throw in all these restrictions and allegiances it's really becoming bloated rules wise. For example I love Sylvaneth but man there are so many rules to remember I would not recommend them to a new player. It slows down our games to chronic speeds mainly because we only play a few times a year but we do play for 2 or 3 days straight on a long weekend 

[WABBIT]

Something like this in our opponents charge phase would help! When they charge you get to move them away from your units instead of towards them  

 

[Yeled]

9 hours ago, awcamawn said:

For me, Wanderers should be an army that wants to fight on its own terms and is good at ensuring that it does so, controlling the battlefield so that the enemy is largely forced to fight where and when and how a Wanderer general wants them to. Their weakness, then, should be when an enemy can catch them flat footed and dictate the terms of engagement themselves (then they squish real good and quick, GW has nailed this part). I think GW has done a pretty decent job of establishing this sort of feel to their playstyle, particularly with the new allegiance abilities. Wanderers can give key enemy models a -1 to hit debuff for the rest of a game, they can appear and disappear maddeningly and lead enemies on a merry chase, they can use their fey and tricksy nature to remove a powerful enemy hero from a combat, and they have units that can be challenging to use to their fullest (I mean this in a good way, after a fashion).

I think this is a great description of what we want the Wanderers to be. Mind if I put a few sentences from it in the first post?

Also, it made me think about the fact that right now, as written, the allegiance abilities really support us having the Wanderers clump together, especially if we take the Stalker of the Hidden Paths command trait. I wonder if the Wayfinder could simply be another good teleporter with his own Stalker of the Hidden Path ability. That would free up our general to use another ability or allow for multiple models to teleport nearby units to different parts of the battlefield.

9 hours ago, awcamawn said:

Unfortunately with the compendium changes we lost as many cool/fluffy rules as we gained with the new GHB. Some of the things that seem to fit the Wanderer playstyle and 'feel' to the army were lost. The Soporific Breath ability that the Forest Dragon has is really cool and fluffy and I think adds a fun strategic element for both players as to how to position yourself to maximize/minimize the number of units it effects. We got a somewhat similar ability with the Forget-Me-Knot artifact which is awesome, and I think both are perfect examples of ways to give Wanderers ways to control the battlefield, and I would like to see more of this sort of thing if we get any updates. I also really like the Wardancers' cycle of dances to choose from, which is similar in a way to the choice of shot type for Waywatchers/Waywatcher hero. These make the units more flexible and give you a tactical choice to make, and I think it would be cool to see more such modal abilities in GW rules writing in the future. Another thing Wanderers lost was the compendium battalion, which was pretty restrictive and mediocre overall but had a cool rule that fits Wanderers really well - the ability to resist the dangerous effects of scenery rules. 

This is good food for thought, too. I'm going to hold off addressing a lot of it right now simply because I want to finish the existing units first, but when we get to compendium units and new units I'll bring it back up again.

 

23 minutes ago, WABBIT said:

I think they need their old Ward save back to make them much more resilient, that lessens the need for increasing range but it would still help. Hitting on 3's for elite cav is a must.  Being more resilient really makes them more useful with the Melt away ability too as they may actually survive in enough numbers to be able to shoot back effectively.

What was their old Ward save? I'm not familiar with 8th edition rules as I didn't get back in to Warhammer until AoS was released. A Ward save that grants resiliency combined with a 3+ to hit value and a little more range could make these guys...well, still not as good as palladors, but at least more palatable in terms of their points cost.

I also like the idea of allowing for more spells as the unit gets bigger. As it stands now you'd never take a big unit of these guys. It would be better to have two units of five than one unit of ten due to their spellcasting. That said, I'm still not sure two spells at 10 would entice me to buy a unit of ten. They are just too expensive and the rule of 1 that allows only for one spell of a given type makes them unpractical.  

[WABBIT]

4+ save same as phoenix guard

[Yeled]

5 minutes ago, WABBIT said:

Something like this in our opponents charge phase would help! When they charge you get to move them away from your units instead of towards them  

 

Nice. I did suggest an ability in the first post that said that when an enemy unit declared a charge, but before dice were rolled, the target Wanderer unit could maybe make a D3" move first in order to either put themselves in the best position or move out of range. I think it was the Wyldwood Rangers. I was trying to make them harder to engage so they could get their frail asses into combats they wanted rather than the other way around.  

[WABBIT]

5 minutes ago, Yeled said:

 

I also like the idea of allowing for more spells as the unit gets bigger. As it stands now you'd never take a big unit of these guys. It would be better to have two units of five than one unit of ten due to their spellcasting. That said, I'm still not sure two spells at 10 would entice me to buy a unit of ten. They are just too expensive and the rule of 1 that allows only for one spell of a given type makes them unpractical.  

I think you're right however they do offer a fast mobile unit with 20 wounds so very resilient plus a mystic shield and Shield of thorns from the same unit is quite useful and much more survivable especially cast on themselves with a ward save as well - plus you can get closer to enemy casters to attempt unbinds.

[Yeled]

I had another thought on the Spellweaver. @chord and @WABBIT both suggested that abilities that limit their targets to one faction are less desirable. Ok. Why not allow the spellweaver to revive D6 wounds worth of models (rounding up), and have it work on all aelves rather than on just Wanderers? That would make the spellweaver much more flexible, especially if we had aelven allies or a mixed order army.

[WABBIT]

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

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).

[Yeled]

Given our conversation, I'm suggesting the following update to the SotT entry in the first post. New text/changes in blue. Let me know your thoughts.

 

Sisters of the Thorn. These very expensive wizard/cavalry are really only exceptional for their Shield of Thorns spell. It's especially devastating when stacked with cover, mystic shield, and/or the Eternal Guard Fortress of Boughs ability to buff up when standing still. Due to the new allegiance abilities, however, EG are standing still a lot less frequently than they once were. I've heard a couple Wanderer players suggest they don't want to bring these any more because they aren't used as much. Outside their spellcasting, they are are fairly mediocre unit that neither excels at combat or at range, and they are fairly frail. Essentially they are an overpriced spellcaster with speed and more wounds than usual. 

• These guys can probably stay the same as they are a good unit. Consider lowering the points significantly since they aren't even close to Palladors for the same points, and the one thing they do really well (the Shield of Thorns) is a good but not great spell in our lists given the changes to play style brought by allegiance abilities. If other units were adjusted such that their buffs were more effective with the Realm Wanderers allegiance ability, then maybe the points would only need to drop a tiny bit.
• Alternatively, make these a truly elite unit. A unit that costs 220 points needs to do more than a spell that only works two to four times a game. Consider adding all of the following.
  • Give them a 3+ to hit on their javelins. A unit that costs 220 pts should be at least 3/4/-/1.
  • A 12" range on the SotT javelins would be quite nice as well - at least they'd be able to throw them after using the Realm Wanderers allegiance ability. Any time we can build on the excellent allegiance ability we should consider doing it. This plus the item above would add a cavalry archer role to SotT as well.
  • Give them back their Ward Save ability: Any time the Sisters of the Thorn suffer a wound or MW, they ignore it on a 4+. This is probably the most important change you can make, as it makes the Sisters so much more usable in a variety of situations. It would instantly make this one of the best Wanderer units available.
• Another problem with SotT is that larger units are a complete waste. Wanderer players would never take these in unit sizes larger than the minimum. It just means we're paying premium for a mediocre unit and giving up more spells. 2 units of 5 is always better than 1 unit of 10. Fix this by:
  • Allowing them to cast 2 spells at 10 models and 3 spells at 15 models. 
  • Alternatively, if they get their Ward Save back, allow them to pick another nearby unit to benefit from the Ward Save or extend it's range for every five surviving models in the unit. This second option would instantly make big units of SotT desirable.

[Yeled]

First post updated with revised SotT material. New text in blue. I'll write up the draft spellweaver entry shortly. Thanks for everyone's input. 

[Yeled]

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.

[Pigey]

Great thread. Love everything about it. One suggestion for the EG and their ability.  Instead of being triggered by not moving how about being triggered when the unit is wholly within a piece of scenery? This would enhance the scenery use mentioned in the first post and emphasize the fact Wanderers are just good at taking hold of any piece of terrain. I can picture the EG setting up in some ruins and taking position so that it becomes really hard for the enemy to take it. Very thematic to me.

[Yeled]

8 hours ago, Pigey said:

Great thread. Love everything about it. One suggestion for the EG and their ability.  Instead of being triggered by not moving how about being triggered when the unit is wholly within a piece of scenery? This would enhance the scenery use mentioned in the first post and emphasize the fact Wanderers are just good at taking hold of any piece of terrain. I can picture the EG setting up in some ruins and taking position so that it becomes really hard for the enemy to take it. Very thematic to me.

I agree that would be thematic. Do people feel it would be too narrow in application? It makes EG into objective defenders rather than protectors of the archers, since they would have a lot less flexibility in terms of where they could deploy Fortress of Boughs. That might be ok if the archers were better at skirmishing/surviving a first round of combat.

Also, do you think it should be "wholly within" or "within x inches" of a piece of scenary?

Thoughts?

[WABBIT]

Too narrow for me. The bough of spears is like a prickly hedgehog so quite hard to do in terrain so it's not really in keeping with the description. Making it in terrain only limits it even further and it is bad enough they cannot move - I don't think they can pile in either so it's a bit of a nerf for a big gain as well. The only thing I would like is to be able to pile in but it doesn't really keep in the spirit of what the ability is described as.