Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Unofficial Bretonnian Battletome  

235 members have voted

  1. 1. Would a full unofficial Bretonnian Battletome for AoS interest you?

    • Yes! I have something to offer for this project so i will notify you!
      14
    • Yes! I would love to see this and really hope it gets done!
      138
    • Sure, hope it happens.
      42
    • Nah, too complicated...
      6
    • No I am fine with things as they are.
      21
    • NO! DEATH TO THE LADY!
      22


Recommended Posts

I took 10 foot knights against 10 ardboys, the knights fell like flies! They need 2 wounds to be competitive against equal units!

 

same thing happened to the grail knights... not a chance!

 

Edit: 320 seems right! I mean look at the free guild general, that one cost 260!

Edited by Cayseymax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of all the things I think Grail Knights are fine as they are, most well made armies are more than their individual components. 

Let's actually break it down.

Realistically you won't make a commitment with them unless you're sure that they'll do something. I'm going to make the following (I think reasonable) assumptions: 1.They make a charge, 2. They have The Blessing of the Lady cast on them, 3. They're within 10" of a Damsel model.   

So that means they're hitting on 2+ with a re-roll, factoring in a favour token for +1 attack on the charge that's basically 20 attacks that hit. 

As to wounding it's on a 2+ but a 4+ converts those into mortal wounds, so that's 20 mortal wounds off the bat.  Factoring in the 8 wound rolls that are 2+/3+ (erring on the side of caution here) against your example of a unit that has a 4+ save. 4 will get through and inflict a further 8 damage. 

That means with the application of one spell  5 Grail Knights will just fall short of wiping a 10 man unit of Brutes, so I fail to see how they're toothless at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit: Directed at CayseyMax

I think you need to be pretty careful about such analysis and be a bit more objective.

 

Ardboyz are a pretty competitive unit at 180 points, but they don't really have any special abilities other than the fact they can mix weapon types in the unit and having 2 wounds each.

There are plenty of other elite 1 wound infantry units at the 160/180 point price range that don't have 2 wounds but make up for it with a flavouring of special rules. Units like Swordmasters, Black Guard, Executioners, etc. 

There's also no reason why Foot Knights should have 2 wounds. Similarly why should Pegasus Knights have rend -1? There's nothing on the kit that makes it seem like Foot Knights are tougher or Pegasus Knights lances are more special than regular lances. Those are things you need to consider and justify, and sometimes the solution is not to change statistics, it's to reduce points instead if necessary.

Currently, GW think 1 wound elite infantry should be priced in the 140-180 range. Foot Knights fit the bill, and should also be in that range, and being superior to Greatswords should probably sit at the 10 for 160 mark.

 

It's for similar reason you can't just say "Grail Knights are ******, they can't beat 5 Brutes!". Well, Grail Knights have a lot of advantages over Brutes. You can't just sum up combat profiles to determine points. Grail Knights are more than twice as fast as Brutes and have +2 bravery over them (a huge issue most people have with Brutes), those are not things you can easily discount and perhaps Grail Knights won't beat them in a straight up fight (Although, I suspect the Grail Knights would go in and skewer a bunch of them on the charge and cause a bunch more to flee.

Then you've also got to think that the allegiance abilities also provide some additional synergies to grail knights which makes them even better and have arguably fairly easy access to re-rolls in the damsel/enchantress synergy.

I can tell you now I'd love to have Grail Knights (possibly even Breton or current version) in my Free Peoples list.

Edited by someone2040

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think it’s reasonable to expect them to be 10 inch from damsel when the charge 3d6! Brutes cost 180, grail 200 I lost all fights... that’s not balanced! 

 

i still I’ll think they should have 2 wounds! Are they not dismounted grailknights??? And if not, why not then? 

Are pegasus knights not supposed to be the best knights in the Bret realm? I don’t think it’s a stretch to give them -1 rend, grail knights have -1rend! 

 

The test i did they had no chance! 5 battles with each unit! 

Edited by Cayseymax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Cayseymax said:

I dont think it’s reasonable to expect them to be 10 inch from damsel when the charge 3d6! Brutes cost 180, grail 200 I lost all fights... that’s not balanced! 

They only have to be within 10" in the combat phase, towing the line 10" from the furthest model gives you a hell of a lot of leeway. Even without the re-rolls to hit a 2+/2+ unit that does mortal wounds on a 4+ to wound tears through a lot of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is the probably charge out of 10 inch range since the spell caster keeps away from front line! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cayseymax said:

My point is the probably charge out of 10 inch range since the spell caster keeps away from front line! 

Perhaps. On average that would equate to three missed attacks and so six less mortal wounds/damage. I haven't even factored in the horses attacks either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I did a rematch of the 10 foot knights against 10 ardboys... Now with 2 wounds. Yes I still think they should have 2 wounds because they are knights, not just footmen.

So did 5 more battles this time they lost only 3 times and the fights were a lot more closer. Personally I think that's much more balanced. 160 points are probably the right number. My reason for wanting two wound is simple. My test with both with a longsword and shield and with a greatsword they fell very quickly... Yes 5 battle are not enough to say they would never win and my dice rolls could have favored the orcs, but I was simply sad to see them fall so quickly, and my counter thought was then why would I choose them over mounted knights? There is as I see it no reason to choose them over knights , when they die that quickly, might as well get some mobility then...

As I've stated in my initial comments, I think you guys are really close. I thing 99% of your stuff is great, I just thing there are a few areas where the units could be even more cool.

Personally I just think some few units need a bit more to be something that is worth choosing over more knights.

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Cayseymax said:

So I did a rematch of the 10 foot knights against 10 ardboys... Now with 2 wounds. Yes I still think they should have 2 wounds because they are knights, not just footmen.

So did 5 more battles this time they lost only 3 times and the fights were a lot more closer. Personally I think that's much more balanced. 160 points are probably the right number. My reason for wanting two wound is simple. My test with both with a longsword and shield and with a greatsword they fell very quickly... Yes 5 battle are not enough to say they would never win and my dice rolls could have favored the orcs, but I was simply sad to see them fall so quickly, and my counter thought was then why would I choose them over mounted knights? There is as I see it no reason to choose them over knights , when they die that quickly, might as well get some mobility then...

As I've stated in my initial comments, I think you guys are really close. I thing 99% of your stuff is great, I just thing there are a few areas where the units could be even more cool.

Personally I just think some few units need a bit more to be something that is worth choosing over more knights.

Cheers

How many models did they have for 160 points? 10 models or 5 models?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

How many models did they have for 160 points? 10 models or 5 models?

For the Foot-knight test I used 10. So 10 Foot-knights against 10 Ardboys. So I placed 10 for 160! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cayseymax said:

For the Foot-knight test I used 10. So 10 Foot-knights against 10 Ardboys. So I placed 10 for 160! :)

So wait, you used 10 models (like the Greatswords), and even with 2 wounds each only got even? Even with the Death throw effect?

 

I'm asking because we might play tomorrow, so I want to see what would work best, as we wanted to use a version which we felt was the most balanced :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair I didn’t try with the great swords the second time around! I just used the war scrolls no outside magic! Should have done that, but the battle took a lot longer with 2 wounds so I chose not to! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Cayseymax said:

To be fair I didn’t try with the great swords the second time around! I just used the war scrolls no outside magic! Should have done that, but the battle took a lot longer with 2 wounds so I chose not to! 

Well I meant the Greatswords units from the Empire. They cost 150 points for 10 units with 1 wound each I believe. Do you feel that giving the 10 foot knights (for 160 points) 1 wound each would not be enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

Well I meant the Greatswords units from the Empire. They cost 150 points for 10 units with 1 wound each I believe. Do you feel that giving the 10 foot knights (for 160 points) 1 wound each would not be enough?

Ahh...

No I only tries the Alpha-rules version of the Foot-Knights (10 foot-knigts every time). Here I first tried 5 tests with longswords and shields and 5 tests with greatswords... Against 10 ardboys! I also tried 10 foot-knights (with 2 wounds) with longswords and shields against 10 ardboys.

 

The 1 wound versions sucked in my test... the 2 wound version did not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

But didn’t the alpha version cost 160 for 5? Or did you pick 10 for 160 points, 2 wounds each?

They cost 160 for 10... according to the alpha version rules update posted a few days ago. :)


First I tried the version presented in the alpha rules, then for fun I tried giving them 2 wounds... so still for 160 points...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, I think 2 wounds or whether 160 is too high for them is a moot point.

When you write rules, you need to fit into the existing ecosystem of the game.

Foot Knights aren't dismounted Grail Knights. There's no justification for giving them an extra wound, as they're not really any tougher or any bigger than an ordinary Knight off his horse (and Knights only get 2 wounds because they are on a Horse).

There are plenty of other elite infantry in the game that are also 1 wound. Greatswords don't have 2 wounds, nor do Swordmasters, Black Guard, Executioners, Bestigors, etc. Chaos Chosen don't have an extra wound over Chaos Warriors. They all show their 'eliteness' by having a better weapon profile and additional abilities.

All of these 1 wound elite infantry units are all in the range of 140 to 200 points for 10 models. So Foot Knights while being 1 wound, have to fit into that also. They are clearly at least on par if not better than Greatswords, so can't really be any lower than 150 or 160 points. They are probably not quite as good as Swordmasters or Executioners due to not naturally hitting on 3's, so 160 points sounds right.

 

Even if all these 1 wound elite infantry units are overpriced in game (they might be), you have to fit the ecosystem. Otherwise it just looks like you're writing house rules that aren't objective, and favour your 'army'.

Also, even if it was justified for 2 wounds, they'd then need to cost at least as much as Blood Warriors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, someone2040 said:

At the end of the day, I think 2 wounds or whether 160 is too high for them is a moot point.

When you write rules, you need to fit into the existing ecosystem of the game.

Foot Knights aren't dismounted Grail Knights. There's no justification for giving them an extra wound, as they're not really any tougher or any bigger than an ordinary Knight off his horse (and Knights only get 2 wounds because they are on a Horse).

There are plenty of other elite infantry in the game that are also 1 wound. Greatswords don't have 2 wounds, nor do Swordmasters, Black Guard, Executioners, Bestigors, etc. Chaos Chosen don't have an extra wound over Chaos Warriors. They all show their 'eliteness' by having a better weapon profile and additional abilities.

All of these 1 wound elite infantry units are all in the range of 140 to 200 points for 10 models. So Foot Knights while being 1 wound, have to fit into that also. They are clearly at least on par if not better than Greatswords, so can't really be any lower than 150 or 160 points. They are probably not quite as good as Swordmasters or Executioners due to not naturally hitting on 3's, so 160 points sounds right.

 

Even if all these 1 wound elite infantry units are overpriced in game (they might be), you have to fit the ecosystem. Otherwise it just looks like you're writing house rules that aren't objective, and favour your 'army'.

Also, even if it was justified for 2 wounds, they'd then need to cost at least as much as Blood Warriors.

That is your point of view! I disagree! This whole idea was to favor Bretonnians...  But just disregard my comments then... I think putting a rule set out asking for comments and then brushing most of them aside is a moot point! 

 

Im done! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cayseymax said:

That is your point of view! I disagree! This whole idea was to favor Bretonnians...  But just disregard my comments then... I think putting a rule set out asking for comments and then brushing most of them aside is a moot point! 

 

Im done! 

I'm sorry If I've offended you in some way with my post. I am not one of the writers of these rules, I am just someone offering my feedback as well. 

I  think the point of the project is to make interesting and unique things available for Bretonnians, it's not to make them a top tier army (Another swift way to get house rules rejected).

And part of making good house rules is making sure they fit in with everything else in the game, for better or worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's important to find balance. Though there is no shame in making them good enough to compete with the newer and stronger factions :)

I will be trying this build with my friends this evening for Bretonnia. We managed to make two armies with our models (using the Greatswords for the Free Guilds instead of Foot Knights) and we will play them against Ironjawz and Undead. We look forward to seeing how it will go :)

 

Here are the changes to your current Battletome again, which we will be using tonight :)

 

1) Protection of the Spirits (you accidently put *from* there): This trait feels a bit too situational and also only targets the Nobility units. He recommended changing it like this:

"Roll a dice each time a BRETON unit suffers a wound or mortal wound in the shooting phase. On a 6 or higher that wound or mortal wound is ignored. NOBILITY units may add +1 to this dice roll in the shooting phase. In addition, BRETON units within 6" of a NOBILITY HERO may gain this effect in all phases of the game, not merely the shooting phase."

 

2) Virtue of Heroism: There is already an order item that increases the damage characteristic by 1 against all units. We feel that it would be fair if this virtue would also increase the general's wound rolls by +1 in addition to increasing the damage characteristic by +1 for that weapon against MONSTER or HERO units.

 

3) Virtue of Duty: This is the same kind of command trait that the Free People can choose as well, however their range is 9" instead of 6". We think that it's only fair that the range of this command trait is increases to 9" as well.

 

4) Lore of the Lady: We looked at the Lore of the Lady, and while we liked the idea behind them, we felt that some of their casting values were a little bit too high. Reducing the casting value of some spells would seem fair, especially considering that Bretonnia has no effects that increase the casting values of your spells, they only allow you to reroll them:

The casting value of Fair Tailwind could become 4+, for Entanglement 5+, and for Revivify 8+. Nature's Wrath can stay the same if it also includes our idea (see below).

 

5) Fair Tailwind: We would suggest to make it so that the unit can move in any direction, not just away from the spell caster. This would give it a lot more utility, as it would give you a 66% chance (by rolling a 2, which gives you a 3" movement) to move outside of the 3" range to the enemy unit. We talked it over, and we believe that this would mean that you could charge again (please correct us if we are wrong, but we believe you may charge if you are not within 3" of a enemy unit). That way you could use it to cycle charge with your units. In addition, we wanted to add that flying units could move D6+2" instead. That way it could be used to give your flying Pegasus knights as well as the Twilight banner item more utility. Also for clarification, add the following text: "The friendly unit may not be placed closer then 1/2" to a enemy model. Moving them in this manner will not count as its movement, as it has not moved on its own". That way flying units like Pegasi can make the most out of this, as they could potentially be moved over enemy units they are in combat with, and charge again in the same turn.

 

6) Entanglement: We liked the idea behind it, but I would add that the halved values would be rounded down. This would be fair for a 5+ casting value spell, as there is still a chance that the enemy might reach it's target (unless you roll a 10+, for which you should be rewarded).

 

7) Nature's Wrath: We like the idea behind it, but we feel that it is lacking a bit. We wanted to also add the "Dwellers below" effect in addition to it's current effect, as in that any enemy model within 3" of the terrain (unless it's a monster unit) must roll a dice. On a 6 or more they suffer 1 mortal wound. 

 

8) Artifacts of Legends: We felt that the Paladin with Standard was a bit underpowered for it's cost, and as such we wanted to add the following changes to the Artifacts of Legends item list: "NOBLITY HERO units with the TOTEM keyword provide your army with a free Magical Standard item each, but it may and must only be equipped to them." And also the following: "If the general of your army is not a named NOBILITY HERO, then he or she may be equipped with a free item. As the HERO is a aspiring champion of the Lady, who has risen up to any challenge put before him or her despite the odds." This is in addition to the standard item you gain, as well as the items you gain for each battalion that you field. 

 

9) Shield of the Lady: The text is changed in the following way: "Add 1 to this models save rolls. In addition, this model may add 1 to it's Protection of the Spirits roll in the shooting phase."

 

10) Sirienne's Locket: we wanted to add the following text after it: "If the attack has a damage characteristic of 1 and "-" rend, then for each wound suffered you may roll a dice. On a roll of 4 or more the wound is negated."

 

11) The Silver mirror: We wanted to add a bit more flavor to this item, and change it in the following way by adding the following text: "Optionally, the bearer may instead choose to use this item to automatically cast one of its spells. The bearer may choose to use either effects after it has attempted to unbind or cast the spell. 

 

12) Sacrement of the Lady: We think that this spell could be changed from "Once per battle" to "Once per Hero phase" allowing you to have a better chance at casting or dispelling one spell in your or your enemies Hero phases. This would be a weaker version of the Silver Mirror, but one which you can use for a total of one spell in each Hero Phase. 

 

13) Prayer Icon of Quenelles: While we like the effects, we feel that it is not worth an item. As such we wanted to add one of the previous item effects which you removed: "In addition, the bearer may cast one more spell in your Hero phase."

 

14) Twilight Banner: We were thinking about adding the following text after its current text: "If the friendly BRETON unit can already fly, then add +1 to its run and charge rolls instead". 

 

15) We noticed that the Mounted Squires didn't have the Peasantry keyword and that Foot Knights didn't have the Nobility keyword. I believe that we are right in assuming that they are supposed to have these keywords? That does seem the most logical when looking at the rest of the Battletome.

 

Also, perhaps the Mounted Squires their save could be 4+ instead of the current 5+? They do cost 80 points per 5 models after all, and this would seem fair when compared to other units. 

 

And I believe 10 Foot knights cost 160 points right? The text was a bit confusing, as it mentioned 5 models instead of 10.

 

16) Peasant bowmen: My friend is a competetive Free People's player, and often deploys Crossbow men who cost 100 points, and who can fire twice in their turn with a 4+ to hit and wound as long as no enemy is within 3" and they didn't move. It also has a ability that allows all its models to fire upon a enemy unit that has charged it as an interrupt, as well as a ability that allows some of their attacks to have -1 rend. Seeing as the Peasant Bowmen are supposed to be the best battleline archers around, he felt that their price could be reduced to 100 point (and a 40 model horde could cost 360 points) while also buffing them a little bit. These were his suggestions:

Stakes: "Once per battle the Peasant bowmen unit can set up Stakes in the Hero phase. Any enemy unit that finishes a charge move within 3" of this unit must roll a dice. On a 1 nothing happens, on a 2 or 3 the unit suffers D3 mortal wounds, and on a 4 or higher the unit suffers D3 mortal wounds and its models will be pushed back 31/2" and may not pile in. The protection of the stakes is lost if the Peasant bowmen unit moves or is attacked in the combat phase."

Burning Braziers: Add the following text in front of the Burning Braziers text: "Once per battle the Peasant bowmen unit can set up Burning Braziers in the Hero phase."

 

17) Woodsmen: We like the concept of these guys, but when compared to for instance the Chameleon Skinks they are a bit lacking. We were thinking about giving their Woodman's bows a -1 rend. In addition, add the following text to Ambush: "If the model is placed within terrain then it suffers none of these restrictions, and may be placed in the first turn on any terrain".  And change the text of Surefooted Stalkers as following: "If a model from this unit would be slain while on terrain, roll a dice. On a roll of 4 or more, the model deftly avoids harm and is not slain."

The -1 rend feels fair as the Chameleon Skinks have 10 attacks for 120 points, with 3+ to hit and 4+ to wound. And the change to Ambush would give you the same flexibility of the Chameleon Skinks, however only provided you put them on terrain. With all these restrictions, and the greater cost, changing the Surefooted Stalkers trait to avoid being slain on a 4+ for all effects did seem more then fair to us. Meaning that your Woodsmen will be more restricted then the Chameleon Skinks, but if you put them in terrain they will be a bit more durable. 

 

18) Blessed lake: I take it you mean a DAMSEL HERO unit? If so then we really like it, and we think that this will add a lot more flavor to future battles :) 

 

19) Brothers of the Round: My friends and I felt that some of the Battalions could receive some love. The Brothers of the Round battalion reminded him of a Free People's one, and he recommended adding the following text after the second Ability text: "If the unit contains any Standard Bearers, then none of its units flee on a roll of 1 or 2. 

 

20) Seeing as you need FIRESLAYER units for the Order of the Burning Lance, I think it's important to add the Fireslayers as potential allies. 

 

21) When comparing the Field Trebuchet with the Canon, I feel that 180 points would be more then fair as they are very similar. With each having advantages over the other. 

 

22) For the SAGE'S ORDER, don't you mean COLLEGIATE ARCANE, as this is one of their allies? However, if not then perhaps then the Swordmasters could be changed to a different unit? And the battalion could be reworked a bit? I think that units like the Celestial Hurricanum and the Battlemage on Griphon would be really fitting allies to the Bretonnians. In addition to changing the unit of Swordmasters requirement (this could be Foot Knights instead), we were thinking about changing the text as following:

"All units in the Sage's Order may re-roll hit rolls of 1 if they are within 10" of a COLLEGIATE ARCANE WIZARD. If they already have this effect, then they may reroll all failed hit rolls.

Friendly COLLEGIATE ARCANE WIZARD units add +1 to their casting rolls if they are within 10" of a unit from the Sage's Order. In addition, the COLLEGIATE ARCANE WIZARD from the Sage's Order gains the BRETON and NOBILITY keywords and can temper with the fates. Once per phase you can increase or decrease the result of a single dice roll for this unit  by one."

 

in addition the battalions cost could be decreased to 120 points, as the second trait mostly only affects the Sage’s Order Wizard. 

 

23) We love the Royal Airforce, but with the second ability requiring one of your Favour Tokens it feels fair to us to reduce it's cost to 140 points instead. And perhaps the Ragged Brotherhood could be reduced to 120 points, the Defenders of the Realm to 100 points, and the Peasant Militia to 80 points? 

 

24) The Examplar Order: We liked how it had a restriction, but at the very least we feel that for 120 points it should have another trait. As such we were thinking about adding the following second text: "All units from the Examplar Order may add +1 on their hit rolls if they are within 10" of a NOBILITY HERO and they made a Charge move this turn. 

 

25) The Black Order: We feel that for 100 points he should have another ability trait, and as such we were thinking about adding the following second trait: "Enemy units within 8"must always make a battleshock test, and must ignore effects that would otherwise prevent them from doing so. In addition, if your opponent makes a battleshock test for these units roll a dice. If the result is higher than the result of your opponent's dice, D3 additional models flee from the unit (as well as any that flee because of the test).

 

26) King Louen Leoncoeur: We feel that even with all his abilities he is way too expensive with his current 380 points cost. Reducing his point cost to 320 would seem fair, especially when compairing him to other Legendary Lords (as a LL he cannot be equipped with a item, nor gains any command traits after all). This way he would still be pretty expensive, but at least his current cost would be fair considering his abilities. 

 

27) We loved the idea of adding the Demigryph Knights to the Bretonnian roster, but how about you also add a Breton version of the General of Griffon? You could use the concept of the Freeguild General on Griffon https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-freeguild-general-griffon-en.pdf while replacing some keywords for the unit and its abilities, and also giving the Charging Lance a +1 on wound rolls if the model charged this turn. That way he could be a cheaper alternative (260 points like the standard General on Griffon) to King Louen Leoncoeur, who would lack many of the King's Utilities, but in exchange would be better in combat. Also this would give Bretonnia a much needed Monster unit. This NOBILITY HERO could be called a ARCHDUKE ON GRIFFON, giving you more options to choose from. 

 

28) Green Knight: We agree with Cayseymax that the Green Knight should have 6 wounds, which is only fair. Price stays the same. 

 

29) Grail Knights: We also think that the Grail Knights should have a commander, who gains a extra attack like the other units. As well as a 3+ to wound on their Sword and Sacred Lances. And how about we add a ability that gives a similar effect like the Question Vow from the Questing Knights, but then again CHAOS and DEATH? If this could be in addition to their Sword and Sacred Lances then that would warrant their 200 point cost.  

 

30) Pegasus Knights: Their Lances and Blades could really use a -1 Rend on their attacks. With that their price could remain the same. 

 

31) The Lady's Favour: Whenever you slay a MONSTER or HERO unit, you gain a bonus Favour Token. 

 

32) The Order of the Burning Lance: Change the first text as following: “All units from the Order of the burning lance add one to their charge rolls. In addition, all of their non-mount attacks deal 1 additional Mortal Wound on a wound roll of 6 or more, provided they charged in the same turn.”

 

The second text stays the same. 

 

33) The Order de Chasseurs: We were thinking about making the requirement 1-3 Knight Errant units. In addition we wanted to add the following text at the end of the second text: “In addition the Knight Errant units from this battalion gain The Questing Vow ability from the Questing Knights. Provided they are within 10” of a Questing knights unit.”

 

34) Defenders of the Realm: we felt the Defenders of the Realm was a bit lacking, even with the suggested cost reduction to 100. Therefor we wanted to add the following lines at the end of the second text: “In addition, provided these units performed all of their attacks against non- MONSTERS/HEROES and they slew more then 10 models (including those lost in the battleshock test), they may both run and charge in the following turn. They may then also move over these non-MONSTER/HERO units as if they could fly, provided they end their retreat more then a 1/2” away from enemy models. 

Edited by Nielspeterdejong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are really great and insightful suggestions! I agree with them all! 

 

I especially agree with the peasant bowmen thing! They should cost no more than 9 points per model and I think 40 is a good max unit size! 

 

EDIT: After reading closer... The Grain Knight suggestion is spot on!!!!

 

 

Edited by Melcar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad you like those ideas, because we sure did! :) It is too late now, but I will write about our matches this evening tomorrow. It was a heck of a lot of fun! Even with our own Bretonnian suggestions they were still above average, but we think they actually have the tools to keep up with the more meta armies. 

 

We had two matches, in one a player won, and in another I lost against the Ironjawz. It honestly felt a lot of fun, even as I got destroyed. We noticed that you have to make sure to get your charges off, otherwise you have a serious problem.

 

I will tell more tomorrow, but I honestly feel they REALLY need our suggestions, otherwise we think they will be way too underpowered. As they were with our proposed changes, they felt strong yet also fair. They are definately not top tier, but good enough to have a fighting chance!

PS: I forgot to add a few more texts to the changes suggestion list. These are 32-34, we used these in our match tonight as well :)

 

Edited by Nielspeterdejong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

I think it's important to find balance. Though there is no shame in making them good enough to compete with the newer and stronger factions :)

I will be trying this build with my friends this evening for Bretonnia. We managed to make two armies with our models (using the Greatswords for the Free Guilds instead of Foot Knights) and we will play them against Ironjawz and Undead. We look forward to seeing how it will go :)

 

Here are the changes to your current Battletome again, which we will be using tonight :)

 

1) Protection of the Spirits (you accidently put *from* there): This trait feels a bit too situational and also only targets the Nobility units. He recommended changing it like this:

"Roll a dice each time a BRETON unit suffers a wound or mortal wound in the shooting phase. On a 6 or higher that wound or mortal wound is ignored. NOBILITY units may add +1 to this dice roll in the shooting phase. In addition, BRETON units within 6" of a NOBILITY HERO may gain this effect in all phases of the game, not merely the shooting phase."

So basically a better, but slightly more positionally situational version of the GA:Death battle trait? If this was the only one then I could see it. But with two other battle traits this suggestion is simply too powerful to be considered.  

2) Virtue of Heroism: There is already an order item that increases the damage characteristic by 1 against all units. We feel that it would be fair if this virtue would also increase the general's wound rolls by +1 in addition to increasing the damage characteristic by +1 for that weapon against MONSTER or HERO units.

Adding to the to wound roll is a very dangerous game due to The Lady Wills It! I'd like to keep Breton characters from becoming unstoppable mortal wounding machines.

3) Virtue of Duty: This is the same kind of command trait that the Free People can choose as well, however their range is 9" instead of 6". We think that it's only fair that the range of this command trait is increases to 9" as well.

I kind of like that the Freeguild version is a bit better. Means that they have a niche that no-one else fills.

4) Lore of the Lady: We looked at the Lore of the Lady, and while we liked the idea behind them, we felt that some of their casting values were a little bit too high. Reducing the casting value of some spells would seem fair, especially considering that Bretonnia has no effects that increase the casting values of your spells, they only allow you to reroll them:

The casting value of Fair Tailwind could become 4+, for Entanglement 5+, and for Revivify 8+. Nature's Wrath can stay the same if it also includes our idea (see below).

Revivify as an 8+ seems fair, although I still need to work on the wording. And I'm not that happy with Strengthen Spirits so that'll probably be replaced by something else.  

5) Fair Tailwind: We would suggest to make it so that the unit can move in any direction, not just away from the spell caster. This would give it a lot more utility, as it would give you a 66% chance (by rolling a 2, which gives you a 3" movement) to move outside of the 3" range to the enemy unit. We talked it over, and we believe that this would mean that you could charge again (please correct us if we are wrong, but we believe you may charge if you are not within 3" of a enemy unit). That way you could use it to cycle charge with your units. In addition, we wanted to add that flying units could move D6+2" instead. That way it could be used to give your flying Pegasus knights as well as the Twilight banner item more utility. Also for clarification, add the following text: "The friendly unit may not be placed closer then 1/2" to a enemy model. Moving them in this manner will not count as its movement, as it has not moved on its own". That way flying units like Pegasi can make the most out of this, as they could potentially be moved over enemy units they are in combat with, and charge again in the same turn.

I'm thinking about simplifying it. Just have it give target unit +3" movement. Simple and still retains utility. 

6) Entanglement: We liked the idea behind it, but I would add that the halved values would be rounded down. This would be fair for a 5+ casting value spell, as there is still a chance that the enemy might reach it's target (unless you roll a 10+, for which you should be rewarded).

This spell is too powerful as is. The 10+ casting kicker is going to be removed. Also as far as I'm aware everything in AOS gets rounded up, so there's no need to change that unless I'm mistaken? 

7) Nature's Wrath: We like the idea behind it, but we feel that it is lacking a bit. We wanted to also add the "Dwellers below" effect in addition to it's current effect, as in that any enemy model within 3" of the terrain (unless it's a monster unit) must roll a dice. On a 6 or more they suffer 1 mortal wound. 

It's the exact same spell as Sylvaneth's Awakening the Woods spell, so I think it's been decently playtested already. Admittedly Sylvaneth have easier access to terrain but them's the breaks.

8) Artifacts of Legends: We felt that the Paladin with Standard was a bit underpowered for it's cost, and as such we wanted to add the following changes to the Artifacts of Legends item list: "NOBLITY HERO units with the TOTEM keyword provide your army with a free Magical Standard item each, but it may and must only be equipped to them." And also the following: "If the general of your army is not a named NOBILITY HERO, then he or she may be equipped with a free item. As the HERO is a aspiring champion of the Lady, who has risen up to any challenge put before him or her despite the odds." This is in addition to the standard item you gain, as well as the items you gain for each battalion that you field. 

If anything the magical standards are the items that need the most reworking as their effects are too strong. And giving out free artefacts is never a good idea.

9) Shield of the Lady: The text is changed in the following way: "Add 1 to this models save rolls. In addition, this model may add 1 to it's Protection of the Spirits roll in the shooting phase."

I'm not intending to change Protection of the Spirits so this is moot.

10) Sirienne's Locket: we wanted to add the following text after it: "If the attack has a damage characteristic of 1 and "-" rend, then for each wound suffered you may roll a dice. On a roll of 4 or more the wound is negated."

This is actually a decent suggestion although I'll probably go for a 5+ on it, thank you!

11) The Silver mirror: We wanted to add a bit more flavor to this item, and change it in the following way by adding the following text: "Optionally, the bearer may instead choose to use this item to automatically cast one of its spells. The bearer may choose to use either effects after it has attempted to unbind or cast the spell. 

This doesn't really fit in with the fluff of the item. I may remove the LOS ignoring for causing the caster of the unbound spell to suffer D3 mortal wounds.

12) Sacrement of the Lady: We think that this spell could be changed from "Once per battle" to "Once per Hero phase" allowing you to have a better chance at casting or dispelling one spell in your or your enemies Hero phases. This would be a weaker version of the Silver Mirror, but one which you can use for a total of one spell in each Hero Phase. 

So having a spell focused item that blows any Tzeentch item out the water? This is way too powerful of a suggestion.

13) Prayer Icon of Quenelles: While we like the effects, we feel that it is not worth an item. As such we wanted to add one of the previous item effects which you removed: "In addition, the bearer may cast one more spell in your Hero phase."

Again way too powerful for both effects. The problem is having an additional cast means no other arcane item would be taken as it easily the best one.

14) Twilight Banner: We were thinking about adding the following text after its current text: "If the friendly BRETON unit can already fly, then add +1 to its run and charge rolls instead". 

As aforementioned the banner are already too powerful (admittedly this one is the least worst offender) so adding more effects seems foolhardy.

15) We noticed that the Mounted Squires didn't have the Peasantry keyword and that Foot Knights didn't have the Nobility keyword. I believe that we are right in assuming that they are supposed to have these keywords? That does seem the most logical when looking at the rest of the Battletome.

No this is entirely intentional although I do fear that this makes Mounted Squires an unattractive option vs Knights Errant so they may be scrapped entirely. 

Also, perhaps the Mounted Squires their save could be 4+ instead of the current 5+? They do cost 80 points per 5 models after all, and this would seem fair when compared to other units. 

 

And I believe 10 Foot knights cost 160 points right? The text was a bit confusing, as it mentioned 5 models instead of 10.

Opps that's an error that slipped through, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

16) Peasant bowmen: My friend is a competetive Free People's player, and often deploys Crossbow men who cost 100 points, and who can fire twice in their turn with a 4+ to hit and wound as long as no enemy is within 3" and they didn't move. It also has a ability that allows all its models to fire upon a enemy unit that has charged it as an interrupt, as well as a ability that allows some of their attacks to have -1 rend. Seeing as the Peasant Bowmen are supposed to be the best battleline archers around, he felt that their price could be reduced to 100 point (and a 40 model horde could cost 360 points) while also buffing them a little bit. These were his suggestions:

Stakes: "Once per battle the Peasant bowmen unit can set up Stakes in the Hero phase. Any enemy unit that finishes a charge move within 3" of this unit must roll a dice. On a 1 nothing happens, on a 2 or 3 the unit suffers D3 mortal wounds, and on a 4 or higher the unit suffers D3 mortal wounds and its models will be pushed back 31/2" and may not pile in. The protection of the stakes is lost if the Peasant bowmen unit moves or is attacked in the combat phase."

Burning Braziers: Add the following text in front of the Burning Braziers text: "Once per battle the Peasant bowmen unit can set up Burning Braziers in the Hero phase."

This makes thing too complicated and Peasant Bowmen are not meant to be peerless archers by any stretch of the imagination. The last thing we want is to make Bretons a shooting focused army.

17) Woodsmen: We like the concept of these guys, but when compared to for instance the Chameleon Skinks they are a bit lacking. We were thinking about giving their Woodman's bows a -1 rend. In addition, add the following text to Ambush: "If the model is placed within terrain then it suffers none of these restrictions, and may be placed in the first turn on any terrain".  And change the text of Surefooted Stalkers as following: "If a model from this unit would be slain while on terrain, roll a dice. On a roll of 4 or more, the model deftly avoids harm and is not slain."

The -1 rend feels fair as the Chameleon Skinks have 10 attacks for 120 points, with 3+ to hit and 4+ to wound. And the change to Ambush would give you the same flexibility of the Chameleon Skinks, however only provided you put them on terrain. With all these restrictions, and the greater cost, changing the Surefooted Stalkers trait to avoid being slain on a 4+ for all effects did seem more then fair to us. Meaning that your Woodsmen will be more restricted then the Chameleon Skinks, but if you put them in terrain they will be a bit more durable. 

Again most of these suggestions seem too powerful. Comparing them against Chameleon Skinks is unfair as they're a pretty busted unit. I do like the idea of allowing them to Ambush into a terrain feature though and will probably add that. 

18) Blessed lake: I take it you mean a DAMSEL HERO unit? If so then we really like it, and we think that this will add a lot more flavor to future battles :) 

Yeah that's just an accidental sneak peek of what the new naming conventions will be. 

19) Brothers of the Round: My friends and I felt that some of the Battalions could receive some love. The Brothers of the Round battalion reminded him of a Free People's one, and he recommended adding the following text after the second Ability text: "If the unit contains any Standard Bearers, then none of its units flee on a roll of 1 or 2. 

Yeah that's what it was partially based off, but again I don't want to fully take away the Freeguild's niche.

20) Seeing as you need FIRESLAYER units for the Order of the Burning Lance, I think it's important to add the Fireslayers as potential allies. 

Thanks for spotting the omission from the Allies list.

21) When comparing the Field Trebuchet with the Canon, I feel that 180 points would be more then fair as they are very similar. With each having advantages over the other. 

Indirect fire and auto hitting units of 7+ seems a fair trade for 20 points.

22) For the SAGE'S ORDER, don't you mean COLLEGIATE ARCANE, as this is one of their allies? However, if not then perhaps then the Swordmasters could be changed to a different unit? And the battalion could be reworked a bit? I think that units like the Celestial Hurricanum and the Battlemage on Griphon would be really fitting allies to the Bretonnians. In addition to changing the unit of Swordmasters requirement (this could be Foot Knights instead), we were thinking about changing the text as following:

"All units in the Sage's Order may re-roll hit rolls of 1 if they are within 10" of a COLLEGIATE ARCANE WIZARD. If they already have this effect, then they may reroll all failed hit rolls.

Friendly COLLEGIATE ARCANE WIZARD units add +1 to their casting rolls if they are within 10" of a unit from the Sage's Order. In addition, the COLLEGIATE ARCANE WIZARD from the Sage's Order gains the BRETON and NOBILITY keywords and can temper with the fates. Once per phase you can increase or decrease the result of a single dice roll for this unit  by one."

 

in addition the battalions cost could be decreased to 120 points, as the second trait mostly only affects the Sage’s Order Wizard. 

No this is meant to be an alliance with the Aelves. I'll have to work out how to word it so the Aelf units don't use ally points.

23) We love the Royal Airforce, but with the second ability requiring one of your Favour Tokens it feels fair to us to reduce it's cost to 140 points instead. And perhaps the Ragged Brotherhood could be reduced to 120 points, the Defenders of the Realm to 100 points, and the Peasant Militia to 80 points? 

I may knock down the RAF and Ragged Brotherhood by 20, but the rest seem to be fairly pointed.

24) The Examplar Order: We liked how it had a restriction, but at the very least we feel that for 120 points it should have another trait. As such we were thinking about adding the following second text: "All units from the Examplar Order may add +1 on their hit rolls if they are within 10" of a NOBILITY HERO and they made a Charge move this turn. 

It is a very powerful ability, and if you're taking this battalion you're going to have a lot of models that benefit from it.

25) The Black Order: We feel that for 100 points he should have another ability trait, and as such we were thinking about adding the following second trait: "Enemy units within 8"must always make a battleshock test, and must ignore effects that would otherwise prevent them from doing so. In addition, if your opponent makes a battleshock test for these units roll a dice. If the result is higher than the result of your opponent's dice, D3 additional models flee from the unit (as well as any that flee because of the test).

I'm not convinced about the extra abilities but I think I'll probably knock it down to 80 points.

26) King Louen Leoncoeur: We feel that even with all his abilities he is way too expensive with his current 380 points cost. Reducing his point cost to 320 would seem fair, especially when compairing him to other Legendary Lords (as a LL he cannot be equipped with a item, nor gains any command traits after all). This way he would still be pretty expensive, but at least his current cost would be fair considering his abilities. 

320 seems a bit extreme but I was thinking 340/360 and giving him an extra attack.

27) We loved the idea of adding the Demigryph Knights to the Bretonnian roster, but how about you also add a Breton version of the General of Griffon? You could use the concept of the Freeguild General on Griffon https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-freeguild-general-griffon-en.pdf while replacing some keywords for the unit and its abilities, and also giving the Charging Lance a +1 on wound rolls if the model charged this turn. That way he could be a cheaper alternative (260 points like the standard General on Griffon) to King Louen Leoncoeur, who would lack many of the King's Utilities, but in exchange would be better in combat. Also this would give Bretonnia a much needed Monster unit. This NOBILITY HERO could be called a ARCHDUKE ON GRIFFON, giving you more options to choose from. 

Again toes, Freeguild stepping. Bretons are more about killing monsters except Hippogryphs, so this would be out of place. I have been thinking about a Hippogryph Knight unit though.

28) Green Knight: We agree with Cayseymax that the Green Knight should have 6 wounds, which is only fair. Price stays the same. 

That seems fair, although I think the whole summoning angle is clunky and not fitting with the fluff.

29) Grail Knights: We also think that the Grail Knights should have a commander, who gains a extra attack like the other units. As well as a 3+ to wound on their Sword and Sacred Lances. And how about we add a ability that gives a similar effect like the Question Vow from the Questing Knights, but then again CHAOS and DEATH? If this could be in addition to their Sword and Sacred Lances then that would warrant their 200 point cost.  

Grail Knights seem to be in a good place really. 

30) Pegasus Knights: Their Lances and Blades could really use a -1 Rend on their attacks. With that their price could remain the same. 

Same with Pegasus Knights.

31) The Lady's Favour: Whenever you slay a MONSTER or HERO unit, you gain a bonus Favour Token. 

As aforementioned this got omitted from the PDF, although it's only when a Breton Hero slays an enemy Monster or Hero.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I disagree, as in our matches we found the Brettonians to just be above average due to their Warscrolls lacking some of the strong utility that other Warscrolls have. I know their abilities seem like a bit much, but please keep in mind that their units aren’t that great on their own. 

 

Also I added 3 more suggestions which I forgot to add :)

Edited by Nielspeterdejong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...