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

CJPT

Members
  • Content Count

    223
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

CJPT last won the day on December 15 2019

CJPT had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

395 Celestant-Prime

1 Follower

About CJPT

  • Rank
    Protector
  • Birthday August 4

Recent Profile Visitors

887 profile views
  1. Yep. This is it. This is the whole reason, honestly. It's a game design consideration that accounts for the limited design space afforded by a D6 system. Having multiple steps to an attack provides lots more places for special rules to plug in. For example, the relative value of three 6+ attacks vs. two 4+ attacks changes dramatically when, for example, unmodified 6s explode into an extra hit. And that, in turn, is different to 6s to hit exploding into extra attacks (as opposed to automatic hits). And the odds change in a different way when wound rolls explode instead, or when they generate extra damage, or when save rolls can bounce damage back to the attacker. Just by separating out the rolls, the game designers gain tons of ways to distinguish between units. In some cases, this is going to result in different ways to achieve approximately the same odds of doing damage. However, the fact that the rolls are distinct allows them to interact differently with other factors. Buffs and debuffs - either from spells, abilities, or terrain - typically affect one roll and not the other, which give them relative strengths and weaknesses against different kinds of units. It's worth considering why Warcry is different. A single attack roll suits that game where it wouldn't suit Age of Sigmar for a bunch of reasons, but the primary one is that it's a skirmish game where most of the skill comes through movement and the efficient use of special abilities. It has a much 'flatter' damage roll because by the time you're in position to do damage, you've already done most of the work involved in setting yourself up for success. It also fits the game thematically that a lowly grunt can sometimes knife a champion in the neck.
  2. I can only speak to the Mutalith Vortex Beast, but I've found that it's an amazing model and an underwhelming presence in the game. It's about as useful as the Chaos Warshrine would be if you had to randomly select which prayer you got to cast each turn, but for the same amount of points. I really like the concept of the unit, which is a debuffing/damaging aura beast that needs to be protected so that it gets to be a presence in as many hero phases as possible. But it doesn't feel quite right because while having a 1/3 chance to do D6 mortal wounds is pretty good, it's super swingy. And the rest of the debuffs it can put out are really mixed - two versions of -1" to move and -1 bravery. There'll probably be instances where one of those is perfect for the situation you find yourself in - but there's no way to set it up because it's so random. Honestly, I wished it worked more like the 40K version - where you can either pick an effect or roll twice. And I wish the effects were more evenly balanced in terms of power - I'd be happy for it to lose the potential to do D6 mortal wounds in return for stronger debuffs at the other end of the scale, like -1 save or -1 to hit until your next hero phase.
  3. Not quite true - the Slaves to Darkness card pack has rules for Chosen, which are resin.
  4. The attractiveness of WHFB to Creative Assembly is about more than the popularity of the setting. The Old World was a good fit for a Total War game: it's a well-defined, historical-feeling space with almost every corner of the map fleshed out and a clear sense of what can and can't happen. That puts it firmly within CA's wheelhouse, which had always been about adopting a particular moment in history and allowing players to move the pieces around. The irony is that this is also why it was becoming an increasingly burdensome IP to GW: the scope for new factions or changes to the status quo became more and more limited as the blank parts of the map got filled in. Over the years, WHFB effectively involved into a great worldbuilding foundation for a videogame (or roleplaying game)and a comparatively limited basis for an ever-expanding fantasy range, which is ultimately the business that GW is in. It made complete sense for them to build up Age of Sigmar as a tabletop game while allowing the Old World to live on in an environment that was much better suited to it.
  5. Broadly agree with this take but wanted to note that post-StD tome, the Sorcerer Lord is a very situational force multiplier for Tzeentch as their buffs now only affect Mortal Slaves to Darkness units - no more supercharging your Tzaangor etc.
  6. It's a Mirrorblade from the Cypher Lords kit for Warcry!
  7. Here's my Fatemaster! She's built from bits that would be tricky or expensive to get hold of if I didn't already have the kits for other projects. If anyone has any questions about particular parts I'd be happy to answer them! I themed her shield around the Paradoxical Shield artifact, which you can see in the second photo.
  8. Aside from fixing the battleshock immunity with Destiny Dice, I'd suggest the following: All units in a Changehost battalion must be fielded at minimum strength. I think this is probably the most straightforward change that addresses the biggest issues - mass Flamer shooting, Hosts Duplicitous tarpits, etc, without needing changes to those parts of the book. Want a block of 20 Horrors or Flamers? That's an extra drop, and you can't teleport it.
  9. I wondering if restoring some kind of range limit to the Changehost would help - e.g, you can only redeploy units that are wholly within 18" of the Lord of Change at the start of the hero phase, something like that. Reducing some of the flexibility or forcing you to move the LoC forward into a potentially vulnerable position would make it more interesting. The other fix would be to simply remove 'Horror Heroes' from the list of valid includes - very few other battalions let you take multiple heroes as it is, and this facet alone elevates the battalion regardless of the actual ability. Or just make it cost more.
  10. You don't have enough units for the Changehost - I'd suggest splitting the pinks into two units of 10!
  11. I ran a unit of 20 Tzaangor in a game yesterday and they were the MVPs. I think a lot of your issues are valid, but stem from the fact that 10-man squads of Tzaangor aren't truly worth the points. At 20 for 360, however, I think they're positioned about right. I don't think they make sense as a unit that you take to fill out battleline - as you've said, that's what Acolytes are for. However, they are a unit that you can build an army around that also happens to take up one of your battleline slots. Yes, they need babysitting by a Tzaangor Shaman, but they offer a good return on that investment. Being able to run and charge, they're ideally situated to score the +1 attacks agenda in your first turn. After that point, they become a meatgrinder that your opponent won't shift particularly quickly. I ran mine as part of Cult of the Transient Form with a Tzaangor Shaman general. They want to be within 12" of a Shaman anyway, which means you're getting a lot of utility out of that setup: +1 to wound from their ability, +2 bravery from the mandatory command trait, and the chance to add new models to the unit every turn from the Shaman's spell. They killed a unit of Ungor, a Cygor and a Ghorgon in the first couple of turns and then broke through to the enemy's backfield objective with 11 models remaining (including 2 new Tzaangor added by the Shaman's spell.) I agree that they have too many attack profiles - although this issue is lessened when you're only activating one unit of Tzaangor per combat phase. As I say - I'd never run them in groups of 10 to fill out battleline. As a horde, though, I love them.
  12. Could we potentially get some clarity on this? It'd be good to know if Kairic Acolytes in a Transient Form list could potentially take a nearby unit of Tzaangor above its starting size when they die (as models are being added to that unit, not returned.)
  13. How do people feel about Tzaangor Enlightened on foot? I feel like they've lost out a bit in this battletome. They're helped by the fact that Enlightened on Disc got a price hike and lost the Daemon keyword, but I'm finding it hard to justify them at 100 points - particularly when compared to Kairic Acolytes, which have more utility, are battleline, and come in at the same price point. Feels like Tzeentch has plenty of better ways to account for the last 100 or so points of a list - if you have 110-140 free you can afford a hero, and less than that gets you CPs and Endless Spells. I feel like they needed something extra - maybe the ability to run and charge, to help them to keep up with regular Tzaangor. Or, like other elite infantry - Chosen, Wrathmongers - they could provide some kind of buff that the Disc ones don't. Or they could be conditional battleline. Without these things, I'm not sure what they're for. Am I missing something?
  14. I agree with this one the whole but the idea that Enlightened weren't changed is one if the big mistakes in the GMG video - they lost the Daemon keyword, which means no more Fold Reality to bring them back. It's a very sensible change, but certainly also a nerf.
  15. I noticed this too. It's gone to live with the Slaves to Darkness. I'm pretty sure that means you can still take it in a Tzeentch army, though? It has to be given the Mark of Tzeentch.
×
×
  • Create New...