'Pull' mechanic in AOS

[TerrorPenguin]

I used to play a bit of Malifaux. One of the mechanics in this game was a 'pull' - so on a roll, (well, a flip in Malifaux) I can attempt to 'pull' one of your units towards me.

Do you think this would work in AOS? I would love to see it as a Slaneesh theme, models luring enemy models towards them, pulling them from objectives, reducing the charge range etc.

Essentially a movement trick like Sayls or VLOAT's but affects another unit. I don't think it could be as much move as Sayls, but a pull of 6" say would make you really think about where you placed your models around an objective.

[BaldoBeardo]

Ooh, good one. Bit torn here. It's definitely a neat "fluff" rule, but it's a potential nightmare for competitive formats unless it can be avoided.

In terms of implementation, I think "in your hero phase, X causes opponent's unit Y to move toward you" would be way too strong. For example, would allow you to pull a unit off an objective and move in behind it before your opponent can really do anything about it.

A better option would be an ability that forces options on your opponent instead. E.g. a spell that means in your opponent's movement phase they must make a full move toward this unit or stay still/move directly away.

Gives the opposition player some license/involvement, and time to potentially counter it. Makes the usage of the ability a bit more tactical.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Screwface]

This mechanic does exist in AoS. The Slaughterpriest's "blood bind" prayer springs to mind.

[RuneBrush]

Bloodthirsters whip does this too (mortal kombat "get over here" move).

With a bit of work, I can see something similar working.  I think an enforced move risks adding a bit too much complexity - you'd need to remove the 'cannot move closer than 3"' rule for it to not look silly (I'm attracted to you, but will stop a convenient distance away) and would need to prevent any other action else you'd just get slapped in the face shortly afterwards (or shot).

Rules that forces charge and/or prevents shooting could work, as would preventing a unit retreating once in combat.

My only concern would be how something like slaneesh would lure a mindless skeleton...  Although I know it's a game and anything is possible there's certain things that I think would just seem odd!

[TerrorPenguin]

Yeah, I agree, some of the fluff doesn't work. Maybe any 'mortal' unit?

Bloodthirster's whip specifies it can be within 3" so precedent exists. Slaughterpriest is great example - I haven't seen this model used much to 'pull' units off objectives but reading it, that is exactly how I would see it working.

I would like to see more movement shenanigans to prevent scoring in matched; at the minute it's mostly 'kill the thing on the objective'.

I also think temptresses luring a unit of free peoples into their 'loving' embrace would be great narrative wise

[KHHaunts]

53 minutes ago, BaldoBeardo said:

Ooh, good one. Bit torn here. It's definitely a neat "fluff" rule, but it's a potential nightmare for competitive formats unless it can be avoided.

In terms of implementation, I think "in your hero phase, X causes opponent's unit Y to move toward you" would be way too strong. For example, would allow you to pull a unit off an objective and move in behind it before your opponent can really do anything about it.

A better option would be an ability that forces options on your opponent instead. E.g. a spell that means in your opponent's movement phase they must make a full move toward this unit or stay still/move directly away.

Gives the opposition player some license/involvement, and time to potentially counter it. Makes the usage of the ability a bit more tactical.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
 

Yeah i think there are a couple of examples of this. one that really springs to mind is the Bloodthirster of unfettered fury.

He uses his whip in a "drawn in for the kill" ability: its only works on a hero or monster though. If you hit an enemy with the whip you rolla dice and move the unit that many inches towards the blood thirster.

Sure it could be modified without to much difficulty.

[BaldoBeardo]

Welp. I now really don't understand all the upset about using Balewinds Vs. Bloodbound... That's awesome. ?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[RuneBrush]

2 minutes ago, BaldoBeardo said:

Welp. I now really don't understand all the upset about using Balewinds Vs. Bloodbound... That's awesome. ?

Slaughterpriest can't make a model on a Balewind move/run.  Not sure about the whip, but the description does say 'move' so likely have to say no (though how impressive would it be to wrench a cowardly wizard off his tower!)

23 minutes ago, TerrorPenguin said:

Yeah, I agree, some of the fluff doesn't work. Maybe any 'mortal' unit?

Bloodthirster's whip specifies it can be within 3" so precedent exists. Slaughterpriest is great example - I haven't seen this model used much to 'pull' units off objectives but reading it, that is exactly how I would see it working.

I would like to see more movement shenanigans to prevent scoring in matched; at the minute it's mostly 'kill the thing on the objective'.

I also think temptresses luring a unit of free peoples into their 'loving' embrace would be great narrative wise

Mortal would work pretty well actually, and balance it in a really thematic way.

I'm liking the idea more and more - going to have to finish painting up my Slaughterpriests I think, not really looked at the rules properly (the once or twice I've used one he's simply been a mortal wound dealer).  It's also an enforced run, so can see it being useful to pull units across Deadly terrain

Agreed, it's really ingrained with the fluff that daemonettes lure their pray in and then simply snip heads off