soak314

August 26, 2019

@Sleboda @Moldek @Lior'LecI think you can climb and then attack in two parts as one activation.

p42, Falling rules, makes a point of differentiating when a moving, non-climbing fighter falls, and when a climbing fighter falls.

Moving, non climbing is at the end of the move action (ie. doing a scooby doo run right off a ledge). If you do this as your first action, you proceed to Falling rules, resolve those, then do your second action. (Ignore for a moment that this rule is at complete and utter odds with the Jumping mechanics, we'll get back to it in a bit.)

Climbing however does not cause you to fall at the end of the action, only at the end of the activation. If you look at the example diagram on p43, you'll see the fighter making two move actions, the first one transitioning into and ending while in a climbing state (fighters that begin a climb are said to be climbing until their base rests on a platform!). He carries on with another Move action, resuming the climbing state, and getting onto the platform. His activation ends, he isn't in a climbing state, he doesn't fall.

Now let's pretend that instead of moving for his second activation, he'd done an attack instead. Ending an action in the climbing state makes it so he does not fall. He finishes the second action, the attack, and you now check his status. He's not on a platform or on the board, but is in a climbing state. It's the end of his activation, while in a climbing state, therefore climbing no longer saves him. He now goes into the falling rules, and your opponent decides where he lands.

***

Earlier I mentioned the Jumping rules being at odds with the moving, non-climbing fall state. Take the example of the scooby doo ledge run. If willfully done, it's technically a jump. The Falling state does not occur, and the controlling player puts his fighter straight down horizontally. The opponent won't get to decide where he lands, as they usually would during a Fall.

Why would you ever not willfully turn the scooby doo ledge run into a jump? Why would you, as the rules writer, go through the trouble of defining a special moving, non-climbing fall state when anyone could just turn instances of those state, during their turn, into (relatively) safe Jumps?

I think this is because Warcry's activation rules were initially written to be like Infinity's. For those not aware, Infinity works off a near identical two-action-per-activation system. The key difference is that in Infinity, you declare both of your actions before you ever touch your tape measure to check if you can actually do them.

***

With this in mind, let's look back at your climbing combat example.

On 8/25/2019 at 10:39 AM, Sleboda said:

Question: If a climbing model reaches a platform that is occupied from the front/"landing point" of the model that climbing, but there is a tiny amount of platform space going around the enemy model that leads to enough space behind it for the climber to rest the center of its base (and the climber has the movement) can the climber climb along the platform's surface, along that tiny space, until it reaches the available space?

(Just to be clear I do think you can solid snake in MGS2 it across the thin ledge via climb up until you get the clearance you need.)

In Warcry with pre-measuring, this is all a risk free endeavor. You see how far your dude can go, see if he can make it to the safe spot. If he can, then peachy. You do a Normal Move, which is also a Climb, to assassins creed around the side safely onto the platform. If he can't, then you don't bother with this course of action at all.

But if you were doing this with no pre-measuring, from the bottom of the climb, you risk not making that second move action all the way. If you'd declared Move > Move, started the climb on the first action, carried it on with the second, and ended up either in a climb state without fitting legally onto the platform, then you'd fall.

Imagine a similar situation, but with both fighters up on the platform. Say one player activates and wants to move around the other without engaging. He declares Move > Move to run past the other guy while staying up on the platform. If he fudges the first move, and ends up not on full platform contact, he'll then fall. If he saves himself by saying he'll climb around the ledge for the first move, he still has to successfully make it onto a flat surface with both moves. If he ends while climbing, he again falls.

So uh yeah I think you can climb and attack but I also think warcry was made with a "declaration first no pre-measuring" action system initially, up until someone in corporate told them to make it ez premeasure all the time because it was too close to Infinity / too fiddly for their vision of a simple system.

August 25, 2019

To be perfectly honest, if I were new and coming into the tourney scene, and someone told me they'd prepared a curated tournament environment for me where the most problematic elements of the scene are curbed in favour of a less negative gaming experience, I'd just drop AoS then and there. It tells me the game isn't balanced at all and wasn't made with competitive play in mind.

Consider running meeting engagements instead of standard maybe?

ME de-bloats the game in a lot of ways by removing stacked horde buffs, limiting what you can wombo combo for allegiance stuff, and staggering out deployment so entire armies aren't ramming into each other turn 1.

Also it's 1k points working off 2x MSU at the most. That's a hell of a lot more accessible than pretty much any of the other tryhard options, especially for new players.

August 25, 2019

5 hours ago, Dew said:

All my boyz are built and ready.

Have a tournament coming up and I want to give them a shot. Here's my thoughts? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Hopefully I can get a few games in before.

Arrow boss

Big Stabba

2 totems

2 arrow boys

3 shield choppas

I know for sure there will be nighthaunt and two different mostly squig warbands there at least

I'd drop some bodies to make room for another stabba. I've found a totem and a stabba in your dagger and shield each can really help give you the punch you need vs tougher warbands.

Arrow boys are a tempting grab but I'd drop em for the aforementioned stabba or more shield choppas.

Agreed that arrowboss is the way to go for tryharding, dead cheap 25 wounds at 4T. You could stick him in a battle group next to a stabba to give that stabba either alpha strike/catchup capability depending on situation. Turning an early high value double into a triple and chucking your stabba right into your opponent's most important model on your first activation does a number on their morale.

August 24, 2019

Hey all, I've released my rules for Greenskinz, and have updated the Dispossessed rules

Dwarf update includes:

Spoiler

Hammerers and Longbeards redone
Ironbreakers down 1S up 1T
Gargant Slayer damage down to 3/6 from 4/6
All Leaders except the Gargant Slayer now have the Champion runemark (for access to shield wall)
Standard Bearer/Musician added

Testing and feedback is as always greatly appreciated!

August 23, 2019

We've been houseruling cover into... well something that makes a bit more sense as necessary. As written it's serviceable, but the moment you have two models up against a wall trying to whack each other (one might be in cover!) we just throw the basic cover rules in the bin and play it by ear.

Another thing is fall damage and dangerous terrain. I'd tweak it to 1d6 wounds from 3 inches of falling, then add another 1d6 per inch over. If there's dangerous terrain where you land, just do another 1d6 wounds. Falling's waaay too safe IMO. It reminds me of how an ork in gorkamorka could pinball between a cascade of dramatic vehicle collisions and come out completely unhurt (funny but immersion shattering).

Also a basic courtesy ruling of 'if the scenario generated is an instawin from one side, redraw the condition or deployment as necessary, or maybe just don't make it so you instantly win the scenario if you're the one picking the conditions'.

August 21, 2019

Too early to call. There have barely been any tournaments and the one I did see report winners had still houseruled their twists a bit. Even then, the campaign mode is an entirely different beast altogether.

This forum's userbase also tends to be way reliant on theorycraft, so even after a few months on I'd say its better to just speak with people on your store who run the factions. Or better yet, make a point of playing as/against them yourself.

August 20, 2019

The minus to max range ones always get stormcast players testy. Don't mind em myself but I can imagine why you'd not enjoy pulling em out.

Other than that maybe the minus to movement ones? Some people just dislike having penalties, and while I enjoy the challenge I *don't* enjoy when the other person starts blaming your win/their loss entirely on the twist.

I'd have preffered if the twist was all just bonuses just to get rid of that particular psychological variable. But it's easy enough to cull out the cards and personalise your group's deck.

August 18, 2019

More Battle Reports!

GAME 1 vs IRONJAWZ (me as dwarf)

Spoiler

Dispossessed:
Dagger: Thunderer x3
Shield: Thunderer x4, Thunderer Veteran
Hammer: Thunderer x3

Ironjawz
Dagger: Brute w/ Double Choppas x2
Shield: Brute w/Double Choppas, Brute Boss (no claw ver)
Hammer: Brute w/ Double Choppas

Totally forgot the deployments on these next few reports! But the victory condition for this one was realmstone hunt. Shield comes out turn 2 for this game.

Turn 1, the dwarfs squat on high ground and secure two realmstone. The orruks have to spend two doubles to get their two realmstone secured. Four thunderers pop into one brute, and manage to do 1 wound total.

Turn 2, one brute, despite carting around some realmstone, charges headlong for the dwarfs on high ground. Everything able focuses him down, and gets him to 12 wounds taken. The opposing shields come out, and the five thunderers + leader focus down the other realmstone laden brute, who hunkers down in cover. The boss brute + choppa brute eviscerate two thunderers on the opposite side of the map.

Turn 3, Up on the rooftops, the charging brute closes in on the dwarfs, halving their attacks, chopping one down, and forcing one with realmstone to relocate. His buddy backs him up and takes down another tunderer

Down on the ground, the boss calls a waagh and gives his brute buddy +4 to move. This lets Charge on his turn and easily catch up to the second dwarf with realmstone, who's soon turned into paste.

On the other side, the leader calls for a grudgin' and lops off 11 wound on their target brute just on his shots. But after he does that, the brute moves into LoS blocking cover and forces the 4 other thunderers to move before shooting. The round ends with the brute on 3 wounds left, a win to the Ironjawz!

Dispossessed Losses: 5x Thunderers
Ironjawz Losses: None

NOTES: Gimmicky list with the ten thunderers was pretty easily countered by a high T warband, though I imagine squishier factions (the chaos ones in particular) won't have a good time with it.

GAME 2 vs GLOOMSPITE GITZ (Me as Gitz)

Spoiler

Dispossessed:
Dagger: Slayer x3
Shield: Slayer x3, Gargant Slayer
Hammer: Slayer x3

Gitz
Dagger: Boingrot, Herder, Cave Squig
Shield: Boingrot Boss, Herder, Cave Squig
Hammer Herder, Cave Squig

This was a target assassination game, with the squigs on the defensive. Also a bit of a bloodbath, as we rolled the +1 attacks twist!

Turn 1 was some relatively safe slapping and jockeying to cover engagements for when the defender declares the model-to-murder.

Turn 2 sees bodies start to drop, including the slayer boss who brings the boingrot boss down to 5 wounds after some clever positioning and a decisive use of Rune of Accuracy.

Both sides' hammers pop up on opposite board corners, and I declare it's squig to be the target. The remaining slayers are miles away at this point, and start moving to box in the target.

The next two turns is the most Bloodbowl-esque I've seen this system behave! The remaining non-objective squigs try to take out as many slayers as they can while the rest are body blocked by sacrificial herders. I end up with 10 wounds on the squig, and all but three slayers killed.

Dispossessed Losses: 6x Slayer, Gargant Slayer
Gitz Losses: Boingrot, Boingrot Boss, Cave Squig, Herder x2

NOTES: I was expecting a stomp here in favor of the gitz, but I made the slayers punchy enough to deal with the dreaded squig knights in a couple of turns. I think they're in a pretty good place atm!

August 16, 2019

@Oath Stoned Thanks for the feedback!

A lot of my statline decisions have been predicated on Grudgebearer, and now Shield Wall. Especially on the warriors. I've made it so you can get em to 5T reliably through doubles. 4T's a great baseline, but 5T is where you get rank and file hurting you on 5's only. I didn't want to push this further than that however as it'd invalidate a lot of the other faction's 5Str options vs our chaff. Don't forget Resolute in Defense used in conjunction with Shield Wall also lets them add a total of +2 to their tough, meaning any one warrior can get to 6T, and -1 to all damage for two doubles provided they got a champ/leader nearby.

Bumping warriors and miners up to 10 wounds however is something I've been considering, and will now likely put in with 1.02.

Hammerers and Longbeards are wonky atm, and will get a good looking at. The longbeard is meant to be a support model that can attack from the rear, ala the bonesplitter totem boy. The hammerer is meant to share a similar spread tweaked for 1 inch punchy burst, sort of the irondwarf equivalent of the classic slayer.

Ironbreakers are getting -1att +1tough, because I actually would like ironbreakers in particular to easily invalidate everyone else's 5str.

August 15, 2019

5 hours ago, Dew said:

So can you make all of the available Warcry models from 1 box of Orruks?

All the leader varieties?

You get two duplicates of the one orruk set in the box. Each set has enough for one big stabba, one melee leader, one bow leader, and one totem and skull drummer.

That's two melee leaders as intended. The bow leader only really needs a choppa in one hand to be wysiwyg. That's three bodies for your leaders.

Two totems is all you'll need in most cases, same with big stabbas. That's 6 bodies for the stabbas and the totems, 9 total.

That leaves you with 11 more orruks to work with. I'd say you won't need more than 3 of each kind of melee boy, and likely never more than 2 arrowboyz.

So it comes down to exactly what you need!

EDIT: Also unless you really like em or they get faqd I'd just make the morboyz into more spear, arrow, or shieldboyz.

August 15, 2019

@Skyeline Fabulous!

The only thing ever holding us back from 3 player games of this was the funky deployments on the basic plans, so these are a huge help.

August 15, 2019

25 minutes ago, Skyeline said:

Think this is pretty close to the real thing. Lacks the fancy trim / correct font / textures / and 1-to-1 symbols they use on the real cards. Also had no idea what dramatic name to call it, so it got a placeholder.

Edit: Whoops, forgot to mention this is for the first deployment only. If folks are interested in having the others mocked up like this I can do it.

I would!

Stuff like this is much appreciated.

August 15, 2019

10 hours ago, Oath Stoned said:

@soak314

Cool stuff.

Glad to hear about the cannon pushing the action. Creating No-zones is prolly the best compensation for low mobility. I was worried about 3 movement on the army, but Ill make that trade.

I havent tried any ganes yet but I do intend on using your rules only for science.

One more note. Maybe cut most of the leaders. Its to many leaders to balance. I think we only need 2. Longbeard and a range leader.

Yeah the movement isn't so big an issue when you realize you can shoot at the entire board, even with a mixed loadout. It also pushes people to drop points into miners, and not just take more guns.

If you do use em I recommend going for the classic dwarfs (warriors, thunderers, slayers, miners + their leaders) as I feel they're in a fantastic place atm. The irondwarfs, not so much. I'll likely be focus testing the modern models for a longer period of time.

Leaders, especially duardin melee ones, actually aren't all that big an issue to play around with. You'll find that for most factions the footslogger leaders have the exact same spreads, essentially behaving as the same frontline buff vectors with varying toughnesses and max wounds. The biggest one to pay attention to for me was the Ironwarden, and potentially the smashboss Slayer leader. Both feel like they're pretty alright at the moment, though I need to play em both maybe half a dozen more times each to get a really good say on it.

Additional prospects are a Quarreler leader (just a tweaked thunderer leader with a different range band and damage swing) and maaaaaaaybe a Prospector once I square everything else off.

Final note, I'm trying to get as many options in as I can because the primary goal of the homebrew is to let people play with as wide a range of their toy soldiers as they can. Balance is something I pay attention to, but it's always with deference to options.

August 14, 2019

Testing Battle Reports!

GAME 1: vs Bonesplitterz (me as orruks)

Spoiler

Deployment: Refused Flank
Victory Condition: The Raid
Twist: None

Dispossesed @ 1000
Dagger (Thunderer, Warrior x3)
Shield (Vetran, Cannon, Thunderer x2)
Hammer (Miner)

Bonesplitterz @ 945
Dagger: (Shieldboy x2, Big Stabba)
Shield: (Arrowboss, Big stabba, Totem boy)
Hammer: (Shieldboy x2)

The duardin got to pick defender for this one, and it's clearly where they shine. Every thunderer got to double shoot from turn one. The orruks had to sink triples into Waaagh! every turn to help clear the gap and get to points, but they also had the deployment advantage, forcing the dwarfs into blue deployment.

The cannon, the veteran, and a warrior all helped in dropping my now routine turn 1 big stabba alpha strike. The dwarfs holds the line throughout the game, doing some micro repositioning with their 3 inch movements to keep on points.

The warriors are quite tanky against the s3 shieldboys,forcing 5's to wound, only ever getting instagibbed on three sixes.

The juju stick is a massive pivot in my bonesplitterz list, and the dwarfs know it. As soon as he tries to pop out of hard cover to get a buff down, he's focused down by every thunderer on the board. His 3 inch melee range didn't mean much of anything in this matchup.

The orruks raze a point turns one and two, but can't keep their numbers up to get the last one turn 3. Once the first big stabba was dropped, and the second one screened, the cannon was free to make two more shots, vaporizing a shieldboy each. Even in my custom board which has tons of cover, Rune of Accuracy makes it so the cannon only needed to roll two 3's on 4 dice to wipe a boy out.

The dwarfs take this game, with the orruks just short of one body on the third point to claim victory. The arrowboss could have easily stolen it, but he was body blocked by the miner who made a photo finish 6 inch engagement to deny the orruk boss his full move.

DWARF LOSSES: 2x Thunderers, Thunderer Vet, 1x Warrior
ORRUK LOSSES: 2x Shieldboyz, 1x Big stabba, 1x Totem Boy

NOTES:

Spoiler

> Cannon feels awesome. Needs triples to work to best potential, but can easily dictate a game's flow if taken. Counterplay is crystal clear and taking it is a massive risk since the game has so many anti-shooting twists.
> Classic Dwarfs feel pretty awesome to use. New Shield wall ability lets warriors go up to t5, which makes them very hardy as far as 8 wound chaff models go. Thundererers provide constant punchy, threat but with very little room for placement error on the dwarf players part (slow models).

Game 2:vs Flesh Eater Courts (me as dwarf)

Spoiler

Deployment: ... i forgot to note, it's 'dueling' something or other
Victory: Domination (kill each other's shields)
Twist: Apex Predator (1x Fury)

Dispossessed:@1000
Dagger: (Longbeard, Irondrake)
Shield: (Ironbreaker x2, Ironwarden)
Hammer: (Longbeard, Irondrake)

FeC @ 990
Dagger: (Flayer, Ghoul)
Shield (Flayer, Infernal, Ghoul)
Hammer: (Ghoul 3x)

Dwarfs get priority, which let them pick the deployment that didn't have em sat in the middle. Straight out the gate the warden drops a grudgin' on the infernal, and sinks a few wounds into him. The flyers move up, encircle the duardin shield, and force em to engage or lose to the 4th turn danger zone conditon.

Fury ties up a flayer, which saves an ironbreaker from getting smacked early on.

Turn 2 sees both sides lose one of their shield models each, a ghoul for FeC and an ironbreaker for the dwarfs. The leader gets another quad off, grudging the second flayer but getting lopped down to 4 wounds. Both relevant flayers also get blasted by the ironbreakers in melee, and the irondrakes from the far edges of the board.

Fury goes into an irondrake, and deals a little damage.

Turn 3 starts, the FeC player gets initiative, and tears apart the warden(2 of 3 down.) This gives the last irondrake an opportunity to double attack him, which takes him down to 15 wounds. Both drakes open fire on him but it's not quite enough. The cover saves his butt and he's left standing with 5 wounds left.

As the drakes were shooting two ghouls got to the last Ironbreaker and whittle off some wounds. Once the drakes go, the fury flies up, and deals the last wound to take out the breaker for the win.

If the dwarfs had gone first and gotten a shield wall down, that last turn might have gone differently!

Duardin Losses: 2x Irondrake, 1x Ironwarden
FeC Losses: 1x Flayer, 1x Ghoul

NOTES:

Spoiler

>Changing gromril armor to a tanking aura buff was a damn good call, cheers @Oath Stoned, I honestly don't know why I didn't have it in for the first set.

>The Irondrakes are excellent, best deployed split so a single gunline is never compromised by a fast moving enemy. The moment they're closed on they lose so much of their efficiency.

>Ironbreakers are alright, I think they hit too hard and die too fast so expect em to get changed after a few more tests (T+1 Attacks-1 likely)

>6 inch minimum range on the warden is massive, but I won't touch it for the moment. I want him to function like a backline artillery piece, a cannon on legs that can grudge things.

>Longbeards are funny, I don't know why I gave them the spread and pointage they now have. Will soon rework as they're way too cheap for the potential damage output and utility. Same thing with hammerers, these two cards are a mess lol.

>Considering a cheap 45pt banner unit with the Champion runemark, will probably be the musicians/standard bearers off the warriors kit.

***

That's all for right now, I've got a couple more games lined up soonish, one with all all classic slayers list vs squigs, one with thunderers spam vs all brute Ironjawz!

August 14, 2019

15 hours ago, Tropical Ghost General said:

So question to the group. I have the cards for FEC, but how do they play in Warcry?

Fast, punchy, and tough. They can sacrifice speed on their bruiser options to get more ghouls in. Cannot stress how fast these guys are across the board, at 5 move on the ghouls and access to a triple which is the same as an ork waaagh.

Skewering strike and chosen of the king are insane doubles. Death scream can be a surprisingly potent horde clearer if you chuck a triple 6 into it.

I think their listbuilding is quite flexible despite the base format looking very samey at 2-3 knights + X amount of ghouls left over.

August 14, 2019

4 hours ago, Eldarain said:

Anyone having success with the basic Squigs? They have been rather underwhelming for me.

I use cave squigs predominantly, they're pretty damn good with multiple herders helping to push em along. I've one shotted a few SCE with em, great fun every time it happens.

August 14, 2019

8 hours ago, Euphanism said:

I do find it weird that the Totem guy has range (unlike in AoS) but the Big Stabbas DON'T have range.

Chalk it up to an anti-monster weapon being wielded in quick melee combat I guess?

But likelier to be a go at balancing em out. The big footprint means a 2 or 3 inch range would give them an enormous threat zone.

August 13, 2019

Main post updated with a quick fix to the Dispossessed PDF.

Spoiler

A bunch of the cards had the wrong wound values on em, and are now fixed.
Gromril Armour has been changed to Shield Wall, an area of buff that increases toughness and decreases damage taken.
Bulwark runemark has been dropped from the faction, as the new ability works off the Champion runemark exclusively.

Testing battle reports coming soon!

August 13, 2019

If you're talking narrative play in a campaign with all the good scenario generation stuff, then maybe. They're excellent at pinpoint murder and not dying.

In matched play? Na.

Also daily reminder to people that cover rules exist and will save your butt vs the stormcast.

August 13, 2019

11 hours ago, JPjr said:

Hey if no one else has proffered to help with the fluff I’m in the midst of a work lull so have some spare time, happy to have a crack over the next week and a bit. Just picked up the WC set so only just reading it but should be able to create something ok in a similar theme to the official ones.

That'd be awesome! Campaigns are a great driver for play and narrative motivation, and the warcry ones can get pretty involving despite their simplicity.

7 hours ago, Pagan said:

Thanks for doing this, I am now super excited to paint up some 6th edition warriors and quarrellers for another warband! I will add some of the newer miners also

Lovely to hear!

6 hours ago, tom_gore said:

I would say they are way overcosted for the most part. Should tune up the stats or lower the costs for most units to have some kind of chance against the official warbands.

Noted, but for now I'd like to run some personal tests on em (or wait for people to weigh in after some games on their end) before making any big point or statline changes.

***

A little peek at what I'm working on next:

Spoiler

322373507_PAGEGREENcover.png.e7e73b4aec76bb771a1996e3caf34e33.png

August 12, 2019

3 hours ago, Oath Stoned said:

Overall amzing work. Almost exactly what i wanted to write myself. Sooooo happy you included slayers and miners. Cannon was a bold choice. Also enjoyed your notes.

Cheers! I had to include miners and slayers because I wanted to include all of the old dwarf infantry options. Part of the goal of homebrewing dwarfs in particular is to let people with old collections still field em in the cool new system. If GW ever makes dispossessed rules for warcry, I'm sure it'll be around the Ironbreakers/drakes. This way I'll still have a ruleset for the classic stunties even if I have to pull out the fancier duardin.

3 hours ago, Oath Stoned said:

I would trade Gromril Forged armor for a Quareller/thunderer leader with an abilty to buff range. As you said punchy range makes up for low movement. 3move is very low. Lower than the chaos dwarf from Iron Golems. This will also create very different builds when choosing a range or melee leader.

Tying into what i just said about future proofing, it might be a good idea to not tie one whole ability to being one of the newer models. However, I've actively avoided buffs that work in a bubble that increase range/enhance shooting. This is because people have tended to be very leery of shooting in this game (i.e. people dogpiling on stormcast for being broken because of shooting + toughness). Something that increases range also ups the potential for shooting alpha strikes to be a thing, and that's the last thing I want my rules to do is feel like it's brought that back in from AoS/40k/KT.

You'll mention the leader quad later, and that's my stealth group shooting buff. Along with rune of accuracy, they're the only true offensive abilities I've given em. You'll find that if they work in tandem it can deal a pretty ridiculous amount of damage, especially when you also gang up on the grudged unit.

I'm definitely going to look at Gromril forged armour, though. I think I can work it into something more group defensive (Shield Wall?), that doesn't exclusively belong to the newer models. That'd mean them dropping the bulwark keyword, or potentially giving it to the basic warrior.

And I've definitely considered the Quarreler leader. I think I'll give him the same range band as the rank and file, a longer range, maybe slightly cheaper option to the thunderer veteran. Tradeoff for the range would be the inability to shoot into melee, and str 3.

3 hours ago, Oath Stoned said:

Rune of accuracy might be more thematic if you reword it to deal more dmg to higher toughness enemies. In lore slayers and cannons target tough enemies. Grudgehammer Torpedo should have this as well

Yeah I was thinking of giving both shooty leaders the Destroyer keyword so they get access to the big triple. I'm not sure what to call the ability itself, but I was definitely considering renaming it. Giant Slayer was what I was first thinking, but that's already a model name!

3 hours ago, Oath Stoned said:

Id like to see the leadership abilty be a big aoe toughness buff. Being super tanky is my fav aspect of dwarfs.

Going back to this, I'm thinking of replacing the Gromril double with a triple that works off either leaders or champions. 6" radius, +1 toughness, -1 damage to all hits. Further incentive to take longbeards! And going off my bonesplitterz, I'd say just the +1 tough by itself can be an immense PITA paired with a cheap 4t chaff unit.

August 12, 2019

1 hour ago, Cataphract said:

Question: For the "Chosen of the King" ability, can a Crypt Haunter use the ability on himself?

I'd normally say yes to 'within X of Y model' abilities working on the fighter using it, but in this case the ability refers to a model that *isn't* the activating model, and is also asking for visibility.

I think as intended, it's not meant to work on your leader. Good way to get a horror to a very nasty state, though.

August 11, 2019

mainpost.png.e2e751ddea2b043504555036957af1a7.png

Attached are my custom Warcry rules for Dispossessed and Greenskinz!

Both factions are designed to work off their basic faction boxes, incorporating as many of those units as possible into the rules, hopefully letting you get a warband made with one minimum sized battleline box!

If anyone would like to volunteer photographs of both the basic* and boss** variant of the Gitmob bow grots, I'd be happy to use them in the pdf (with credit!)
_{*bow grot currently has no photograph on their card}

_{**boss bow grot not yet included in rules}
***

While I'm comfortable writing rules to represent their fighting tactics, I'm not quite as quick to come up with something fluffier! So if someone would like to help write up short campaign quests for the dwarfs and greenskinz in the default warcry format, it'd be much appreciated feel free to also make your own artefacts, command traits, and rewards!

Warcry - Greenskinz 1.00.pdf Warcry - Dispossessed 1.02.pdf Design Doc.docx

August 11, 2019

How exactly is Storm Fire different from Onslaught?

From the way Storm Fire is worded, one would assume Onslaught isn't meant to work below 3 inches, but that is definitely not the case!

August 11, 2019

49 minutes ago, RiTides said:

Too light on bodies? And are you guys converting netters somehow? The Zarbag’s Gitz model is sweet, but the ones from the Stabbas box are showing their age...

I think they're lovely! The moonclan grot box is one of the best ones for sculpt, character, and utter ease of construction IMO.

As per getting more netters, there's no real trick to it. Either buy a couple of grot boxes, or buy a bulk lot of the old metal netters from ebay somewhere (the old metal ones are amazing sculpts too).

I've heard of people weaving together wire and slapping it on the end of a pokin spear, that might be something you can try?

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Gallery

Store

Downloads

Blogs

Events

Posts posted by soak314