Regiments of Renown

[Scotian Giant 7]

So this is a thought I've had on my mind for a while now, but what if each army had like 2-5 unique units (effectively Regiments of Renown from TW;WH2)? For those who don't know, these are units that you can only ever have 1 of in the game, but are better than their standard unit variant, but cost more and have some special ability. For my interpretation of them in AoS, this would be two separate +1 bonus' to two different stats plus an added ability.

So some ideas for units I've had are the follow (names not final);

Skaven:

Council Guard (Storm Vermin): +40pts

+1 to save

+1 to hit

Ability: Whenever a friendly hero within 3" of this unit loses a wound, on a 4+ this unit takes that wound instead.

 

Ogor Mawtribes:

The Bruisers (Ironguts): +60pts

+1 wound

+1 to rend (so rend -2)

Ability: Replace "Down to the Ironguts" with, Feast of Flesh. Once per battle you may choose this unit to heal one wound on a hit roll of 5 or 6 with its Gulping Bite attack.

 

These are just two ideas for them that I've come up with, but I'd like to hear what other people think about this idea for RoR in AoS, and their ideas about something like this. I doubt it would ever happen but hey, you never know.

[Zeblasky 24]

As a TW:WH2 player, I would totally support this . More army customization/flexibility at extra cost and another reason to paint one of your units drastically different.

 

Such unit can either give a huge variety of buffs for the units around them or their bonuses can be focused on themselfs only. But I do believe only 1 per army would be quite fair for a start.

[MetaphoricDragon 22]

To me this kinda sounds like what the underworlds warbands should be.  Thpugh from what I've read it sounds like most are underwhelming 

[Lord of the Isle 167]

For me proper RoR are led by a hero and have an awesome story!

[AGPO 878]

Honestly I think it'd be a shame because it would reduce the uniqueness of people's armies. Maybe it's because I come from an era where taking special characters was a taboo, but I like to play armies with their own unique theme and characters who build a story through game play. When special characters become an auto-include that uniqueness disappears, so it'd be a shame to extend it to regiments. If every skaven player fielded the albino guard as their storm vermin unit for instance along with every special character then every army would feel the same.

[Aelfric 1,011]

11 hours ago, MetaphoricDragon said:

To me this kinda sounds like what the underworlds warbands should be.  Thpugh from what I've read it sounds like most are underwhelming 

Or the Mercenary Bands that made a brief appearance, but now have sadly almost disappeared.  

[Beliman 967]

Maybe I'm wrong, but imo, you are asking for a named batallions.

The "tax" is the cost of the batallion itself, they have an hability and being named means that they are unique and have an story behind (the new ones from Broken Realms and the White Dwarf Ironjawz are just like that I believe).

[NinthMusketeer 337]

Narrative play; I have the opportunity to create and customize my own regiments of renown all the time. So the appeal of adding a bunch of new units for GW to fail at balancing in matched is pretty limited.

Edited November 22, 2020 by NinthMusketeer

[Greybeard86 420]

As someone who is currently collecting a large force of DoW (I think I have the majority of the original sculpts!), I would love for this mechanic to come back in force.

[Lord of the Isle 167]

I used to have a lot. Currently just the Vendetta moonlighting as blade Corsairs, the Merc general leading 'Drakespawn' knights and a few obscenely cool crossbowmen