SpiritofHokuto

February 2, 2018

3 hours ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

Thanks for the update!

Well it's a step in the right direction, but with the new Nagash coming up and being quite competitive (and yes, we are going to pick that up, Arkhan FTW!) I'm afraid that at most this army will see just a few plays and will then quickly be forgotten. Playing is only fun IF you have a chance to win.

I understand using the favor tokens though, as I agree that that part of our previous idea was a bit too powerful, and we can tone down in that area. But that again leaves us with a few problems with regards to their overall strength.

Let me reply directly to that:

1) I see where you are trying to go with this, but what about peasantry units? What do they receive? Right now this is more flexible but also weaker version of the Undead trait. Perhaps you could add the text that all BRETON units within 6" of a BRETON HERO will receive this boon in all phases?

Yes this is intentional as it's one of three Allegiance abilities so it being weaker than the Death version seems right in line.

2) Yup, seems fair. Though I would remove the text that you can only gain one favor token per turn. Remember, someones you only succeed at weakening an opponent. And it would not be fair to force BRETON players to wait with killing a deadly unit one turn.

There shouldn't be a caveat that only one token can be gained per turn, but that only one token may be spent per phase.

3) Fully agree there, nice one!

4) Same, it's good that you keep it similar to the Free Guilds

5) Sounds fair to me, though I would also add that this would allow them to be moved outside 3" of enemy units. This way it would allow you to use the spell to cycle charge with a Nobility unit (to make it simpler you could just state that the target unit moves 3^1/2" in any direction).

It would be too powerful and negate the favour token usage if the spell could pull units out of combat. It still gives the utility of a +3" move plus charging with a favour token which is really powerful maneuverability.

6) Agree, though I would also add that the values are rounded down. For such a high spell casting cost that does sound fair.

As I said before, everything in AOS appears to be rounded up, so I see no reason that this would buck the trend.

7) I like this change, though there should then be other ways for Breton to gain +1 on hit on attacks. There are a lot of -1 to hit spells and abilities in the current meta.

Yeah I'm thinking maybe the Ducal Lord on Warhorse's command ability should be +1 to hit instead of attacks?

8) I would also add that it allows the target to ignore mortal wounds on a dice roll of 4+ or 5+. There is a similar spell like this for the Death faction, so it would be fair to keep it similar.

Which spell is that? I based this off Neferata's signature spell but made it slightly worse as it's only fair that a special characters spell would be better.

9) Much better! But also add that it in addition also heals Nobility units for D3 wounds.

10) Fair enough

11) Don't you mean shield of the lady? If so then that does sound fair I think. Though I would also give it a +1 on Protection of the Spritis rolls in the Hero and Shooting phases.

No this changes all of the standard shields that heroes carry.

12) I actually liked the D3 wounds to be healed, but this seems more fair. Seeing as this is restricted to champions, how about you add that the healing increases to D3 wounds if the unit is within 12" of a Blessed lake?

This brings it in line with similar items.

13) Looking good!

14) Looking good as well!

15) Fair enough.

16) I strongly disagree with this. The damsels could really use the +1 spell being cast per turn. Especially with the new lore. I would make it so that they can cast one additional spell per turn (but not also dispell another spell per turn).

Flat out way too strong. It would not only invalidate the other arcane items but most of the other items as well.

17) Sounds fair. But again, I would allow Standard Bearers to gain this item for free. Without it they are a very weak Hero!

18) That sounds fair I guess, -1 to hit is pretty strong. But then I would definately add my suggestion for the Protection of the Spirits, as well as make this item free for Standard Bearers.

Giving out free items is a bad idea. The Paladin BSB is still a unit that needs to be finalised.

19) Sounds fair to me! Though I would suggest also adding the Archduke on Griffon (and adding the Archduke on Griffon in some texts as well) for 260 points.

We're still working on what the final roster of units will be.

20) For 180 points I would add the previous suggestion as well: That once he dies he can be summoned again, but then on a 5+ the second time, and a third time for 6+. But he can only be revived like this twice.

He still comes back on a 3+ so I think that is a happy medium.

21) Sounds good!

22) Very good idea!

23) That would make things less confusing yeah, no problems there.

24) Yup, seems only fair.

26) (this was meant to be 25 right?) The changes all sound good to me. Though I would really suggest adding my suggestions for the Peasant Bowmen. The Free Guild equavilent Crosbowmen have an ability that lets them counter attack a unit that charges them. I would first give them the option to put down those stakes in the Hero phase (same with the bonfire), as well as give the Stakes a chance (4+) to instantly push back one charging enemy unit outside the 3" range (and dealing D6 mortal wounds to large targets if those are pushed back instead of D3), but that the stakes are then removed (even if the enemy didn't attack them in the combat phase).

I'm not convinced on the push back, I'm thinking more a negative to the charge roll is more approriate. Allowing for setup in a hero phase is something that's going to be implemented.

27) Perfect!

28) Yup, fully agreeing there!

29) I like that change! But I would also add that enemy units nearby may not benefit from effects that lets them ignore battleshock results.

All Bravery/Battleshock based stuff gets countered by Inspiring Presence and the like so I don't feel like this should be an exception. That being said this battalion does need something else.

30) Perfect!

31) Sounds fair to me as well.

I'm still not sold on Sage's Order, as it really feels there is something missing there. Also High elves don't give me that "Gandalf the Wizard helping the good people of middle earth" feel that I got when reading the lore of the Order. Having the Collegiate Arcane, and more useful abilities, would really help them out there!

If you look through the fluff document there's lore justification for it being Aelves.

Also, about Nature's Wrath, I understand not adding the extra damage effect, but might I recommend adding one additional feature? How about the target land also counts as a Blessed Lake until the start of your next turn?

That might be an idea, we're thinking about if there could be an interesting side effect for this spell.

Aside from that I like most of the changes. Though I feel they really need these few additions I mentioned to make them more competetive. They will still not be as good as the current meta armies, but they will be good enough to compete.

February 2, 2018

So after much deliberation here's the first set of revisions that are being contemplated. Exact wording to be worked out if the suggestions pass muster.

1. Protection of the Spirits - change to "Each time a NOBILITY unit suffers a wound or mortal wound in the enemies hero and shooting phase. Roll a dice, on a 6+ ignore that wound or mortal wound.

2. Lady's Favour - Additional - If a friendly NOBILITY unit slays an enemy HERO/MONSTER, gain one favour token (up to a maximum of 6) Addendum - Only one favour token may be used per phase

3. Virtue of Favour - Additional "Add +1 to all friendly units Protection From the Spirits rolls, while within 6" of this model.

4. Virtue of Duty - Change to 9"

5. Fair Tailwind - CV5 friendly unit within 18", +3" to move.

6.Entanglement - Remove 10+ CV kicker.

7. Fateful Boon - CV6, gain 1 favour token, can't take total above 6 - Replaces Glimpse of Fate

8. Obfuscation of the Spirits - CV7, a BRETON unit within 18" ignores Rend. Replaces Strengthen Spirits

9. Revivify - CV8 friendly BRETON unit within 18" 1 slain model from that unit is returned. 1D3 for PEASANTRY unit.

10. Duardin Great Helm - Replace with "This model may re-roll save rolls of 1."

11. Ducal Shield - Replace with "+1 to saves if they made a charge movement this turn."

12. Guilded Cuirass - Replace with "Heal 1 wound every hero phase."

13. Sirenne's Locket - Add - "When this model suffers a wound from a weapon with Rend -, roll a dice. On a 5+ ignore that wound.

14. Tress of Isloude - Add - "+1 to wound rolls"

15. Silver Mirror - Remove LOS ignoring - Add "An enemy caster that is unbound by the Silver Mirror suffers 1D3 mortal wounds.

16. Prayer Icon of Quenelles - Replace with "Add +1 to casting rolls"

17. Twilight Banner - Increase range to 12"

18. Banner of Chalons - Replace with - "Enemy models targeting friendly BRETON units within 12" of this model, must re-roll to hit rolls of 6+ in their shooting phase."

19. Louen Leoncouer - attacks go from 4 to 6 on Sword of Couronne. Point drop to 360, Wounds down to 11 from 13, Lion Shield wording same as Ducal Shield plus unbind attempt.

20. Green Knight - Attacks go from 4 to 5, Foliage Shield go from 6+ to 5+, remove Summon Green Knight spell, wounds go from 5 to 7.

21. Ducal Lord on Pegasus/Demigryph - +1 attacks & wounds

22. Ducal Lord on Warhorse - Replace Lord of the Realm with: "Target NOBILITY unit within 15" may re-roll charge rolls and gain +1 attack if they charge this turn. Doesn't stack with additional attack from favour token usage."

23. Remove Mounted Squires, replace all references to Mounted Squires with Knights Errant.

24. Grail Knights - Grail Vow range increased to 12"

26. Points changes: Men-at-Arms 60 for 10/200 for 40, Peasant Bowmen 100 for 10, Grail Knights 180 for 5, Pegasus Knights 160 for 3, Trebuchet 180, Royal Air Force 140, Ragged Brotherhood 120, Sage Order 140, Exemplar Order 100, Defenders of the Realm 100,

27. Brothers of the Round - Ignore battleshock on a 1 or 2.

28. Add Fyreslayers as Allies

29. Black Order - Remove -1 Bravery, add "Enemy units must roll 2 dice and pick the highest when taking battleshock tests while within 3" of a unit from this battalion.

30. Order de Chasseurs - replace second ability with "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."

31. The Lady's Favour - Favour Token Choice 6 - replace with "NOBILITY unit may retreat and charge this turn, however they must attempt to make a charge move this turn.

January 25, 2018

5 hours ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

And in order to succees at a retreat, all models must move 3" away right, meaning that if one enemy model is behind you, you cannot retreat? Or that other can retreat if they can move in one line past them without ending 3" near an enemy?

You can move your models in any order you wish. As long as at the end of their retreat move all models in the unit are >3" away from any enemy model.

January 24, 2018

16 hours ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

But can anyone confirm this? When charging you can’t move over an enemy unless you have fly. Does the same count for retreat?

Yes, retreat is still considered movement and so can't be done over other models unless otherwise specified.

January 23, 2018

No I believe that the only qualifier for a successful retreat is that all models in the unit end up 3" or more away from any enemy models.

Skinks retreating through units to claim objectives is a main reason why they're so good.

January 22, 2018

53 minutes ago, Diemer84 said:

Very nice work with the tome so far, I am impressed and really like the idea.

A few comments on what I have seen so far:

1/ Why have you chaged the spell of the Fay enchantress to give +1 TH and +1 TW and casting 8? I think it makes the spell very risk/reward. But also the +1 TW would make 10 grail knights mortal wounds machines, dealing 30+ mortals and equally many rend -1, which sound like too much to me..

2/ the favour tokens, love ém. But the retreat/charge mechanic seems very un-bretonnian, and also extremely potent. Being able to break from combat and doing a charge 20 inches awar from the combat perhaps even with the above mentioned buffs... what map control!

3/ The spell that offers +2 to save seem imbalanced. combined with mystic for +3. Does really¨get the normal AoS feel with such powerstacking.

4/ achers, making them hit on a 2+ doesn´t feel right for peasant bowmen...

What I could remember after a quick read :-)

Yeah I'm still not sure about that spell. I don't think it's massively overpowered in and of itself but as you said the way Bretons can leverage it means that the Enchantress is somewhat of an auto-include.

Retreat and charge is a very powerful ability but as others have said Bretons need a bit of a leg up. Retreating may seem un-chivalrous but if it's to face the existing enemy or a new one with renewed zeal I think it fits with the fluff. I'll probably put a stipulation in that the unit must attempt a charge after the retreat move.

Yeah that spell is being replaced. The idea I'm thinking of is basically a spell that gives a unit pseudo-ethereal, so they gain the benefit of ignoring Rend for a round.

As far as I can tell the only way to make Bowmen hit on a 2 is to not move, have 20 or more of them, and to be in range to benefit from a Celestial Hurricanum. Powerful on the Arrowstorm turn to be sure, but that's using all your ally points up and it'll be tricky to try and get your cavalry in a position to benefit from the CH as well.

January 19, 2018

1 hour ago, Melcar said:

Even Foot Knights? If not, I think you should!

Yeah they're a relatively new addition to the Breton social dynamic. Designating them as battleline would make them appear more common and accepted within the Breton society than they really are.

January 19, 2018

1 hour ago, Melcar said:

I have been looking more at the alpha version rules... and I saw that the foot knights are not battleline! I think that would be great. Battlelines are generally a massive annoyance, and making that easier to uphold.

I generally think that all types of knights should be battle line for Brets, but in this case I think that as a minimum the following should be battleline:

Knight Errands

Knights of the Realm

Footmen

Peasant Archers

Foot Knights

(Grail- and Questing Knights)

What are your thoughts?

I think making all knights battleline will devalue the likes of the Questing/Grail knights relative rarity. It would also mean that Errants/KotR probably wouldn't be taken except as battalion qualifiers.

We have 4 battleline choices which is as much or more than quite a few factions.

January 18, 2018

16 minutes ago, Melcar said:

Is it your believe that the grail knights can match cavalry units like Chaos Knights???

And a question for the designers... where would you rank the grail knights in power compared to other elite cavalry units? (Blood, Chaos, etc).

In all honesty Chaos Knights are pretty ****** unless used in the Fatesworn Warband. Non-Monstrous cavalry have been given the short shrift in AOS for the most part. With the Breton allegiance abilities I'd easily rank Grail Knights as equal if not better than Blood Knights.

10 minutes ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

Honestly I don't think so. That is, unless they get the changes I proposed, which includes the 3+ wound on their Sacred Lance and Sword, and the "Questing Vow" effect but then against CHAOS and DEATH units instead of monsters. In which case they would be able to beat them. In fact, my friend played one unit against the Vampire Counts. It costed a wooping 400 points for a 10 model unit, but they performed really well against some of the Undead bigger monsters and overall. Which makes sense as they are supposed to be these anti evil champion knights of the Lady.

Have any of your games stacked Blessing of the Lady and Wildform? Doing mortal wounds on a 3+ to wound on the charge is something to behold. I know that this is a situation that isn't always going to happen, but we have to take the big picture into account.

January 18, 2018

36 minutes ago, Melcar said:

Glad you agree in relation to the Foliage SHield!

In terms of the trebuchet, The -1 against units in cover, only exist in the 2017 version of Bretonnia, the first AOS battletome did not include it... Just to let you know! I think 180 points is a very good idea!

Yeah I know it was only present in the revised legacy PDF. But I think it's fair enough as the rule doesn't hinder the Trebuchet's main role of thinning out hordes due to the Seismic Impact rule.

January 18, 2018

1 hour ago, Melcar said:

I think it would be a very good idea to reduce their cost. I think the cost reduction you propose is good and I think the 160 and 180 respectfully is good. To be totally honest I would still give the grail knights a commander, even though they never had one.

I'm glad you also consider adding wounds to the Sacred Protector/Green Knight. 6-7 seems right, but I would probably give it 6 and a 5+ Deathless Minion effect on the shield. (Same effect as a Mourngul have)

Trebuchet

I would remove the -1 to attack against non-line of sight targets (from the official) (since it’s the only artillery unit that has that), and price it at 180. Very easy fix. It’s probably the best unit in the army! Whats your plan here... the unit was not included in the alpha version release???

Yeah a 5+ for the Foliate Shield seems to be reasonable.
As for the Trebuchet I think it's mainly to be a deterrent from hero sniping which is something I very much endorse deterring. It's very good at it's job of thinning out large units, but I can see the merit in dropping it down to 180. The reason it wasn't included is because I think it's the only warscroll that we made no changes to.

January 18, 2018

6 minutes ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

We will have another few matches tonight actually I will let you know more then.

also perhaps you could try to field test it as well? Like you said, the more the better.

Oh yes most certainly. I didn't splash out on a mainly Gamezone miniatures army just to have it sit idly by.

January 18, 2018

3 hours ago, Melcar said:

Some questions...

Why have you not given Grail Knights a commander? You talk about wanting to match other similar units... basically every other unit has a commander, banner and a musician. So why does the Grain Knights not have one?

Why don't you think that the epic elite Pegasus knights deserve -1 rend?

I'm looking forward to your answer, because so far you have just said "they were in a good place" considering multiple people advise you to change them? I'm sure you have a good reason, and I would love to hear it...

I'm glad you have reconsidered changing the King, that was really a important to me, that he really works perfect. Would you consider making him and the Enchantress generic heroes instead of named?

Well Grail Knights have always been like that, none are considered to be above another. Or to put it another way, they all have a champions statline. So basically it's a fluff justification.

Pegasus Knights have never really been considered epic/elite more like standard knights that have lucked out with an unusual mount.

However with these suggestions I'm thinking that perhaps a shifting down of points is on the cards (Grail Knights down to 180, Pegasus Knights down to 160).

1 hour ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

Quick message in between, as I will write a longer response this evening.

I understand that you don’t want to make them too powerful, but what I can spoil is that we found the Bretonnian units to be Mediocre at best. Most races have some really good mechanics and features, which are built into the unit. Bretonnia units however often just have their charges, which are just for the opening attack. When I got charged myself I was left at a huge disadvantage. Like others have mentioned, most other similar units to the Bretonnians are simply better overall, so these strong buffs aren’t mean to make them top tier, they are meant to make a very weak faction above average.

Especially the Protection of Spirits really needs the change we proposed, as without it the Bretonnian units easily fall like flies. Remember, there is a huge difference with how something works on paper and how it works practice. Without the changes to the Grail Knight, the free items as we proposed, and the Protection of the Spirits my friend would have never been able to win against his opponent who was playing the Undead.

Two games doesn't make for a particularly great sample size. There's so many variables from list selection, comparative player skill, plain old luck etc that many more games would need to be played before any solid conclusions could be drawn. A few bad outings doesn't mean we need to knee-****** buff faction-wide, but just keep things in mind as we go forwards.

January 18, 2018

4 hours ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

Honestly so 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

32. Buffing an already powerful ability seems to be a bad idea.

33. This sounds like a good idea and I'll give serious consideration into including it.

34. I can see what you're trying to do but it would be awkward and clunky to word and implement. Maybe giving the units a rider (sic) effect similar to Furies would work?

In all honesty you saying that they appear to be above average means that we're on the right track. The goal is to be above average to good.

January 18, 2018

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 3^1/2" 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.

January 16, 2018

Yeah the Foot Knights are something new that we're experimenting around with, so changes are definitely on the cards.

January 16, 2018

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.

January 16, 2018

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.

January 16, 2018

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.

January 15, 2018

18 minutes ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

Well I talked it over with some friends, and we decided to give this battlerome a field test

We are going to add our 25 suggestions, and remove the exceptional steed, while also adding a trait to The Lady’s favor that gives you an additional favor each time you kill a MONSTER or HERO unit.

We feel that with this they should be fairly balanced, but we wanted to try it out regardlessly We might try it tomorrow or the day after, depending on how many have time.

also, Will the final version have a battle time similar to Mengel Miniatures?

Huh for some reason the uploaded version didn't include the fact that we already had a rule in place that gives you a favour token when one of your heroes kills an enemy hero or monster.

January 15, 2018

Hmm perhaps I'm being overly self critical. I do tend to err on the side of caution, and I'm acutely aware that in some ways I'm standing on the shoulders of giants (namely @Auticus and @Oppenheimer).

As I said before, all these suggestions really gives me some food for thought, and all of them are welcome as it helps us to strive for the best outcome to this project.

January 15, 2018

In relation to the Foot Knights they're pretty much an altered version of Freeguild Greatswords so I feel like they're attributed and costed appropriately.

That being said in terms of scaling things back it's more the Allegiance abilities rather than the warscrolls.

And as always bumping things up and down is part and parcel of the process.

January 14, 2018

Thanks for the comments @Nielspeterdejong there's a couple of things in there that has given me food for thought.

However overall it seems like you think that the rules we're putting forward are somewhat underpowered? In all honesty I feel like they're a bit too good in some areas (spells and items particularly). If anything going forward we're going to be scaling things back a bit, while also tightening up wording and interactions.

Our intention isn't to have a battletome that can challenge the top tier Skyfire Spam or Vanguard Wing lists (or whatever the list de riguer becomes). But to have something that sits squarely in the middle of the pack.

January 1, 2018

2 hours ago, Nielspeterdejong said:

Also does that mean you are going to make new Warscrolls for those units?

Yeah I don't think there's a single warscroll that hasn't been altered in some way. Some are just subtle changes, others are more prominent in their changes.

December 31, 2017

The points values we're thinking about are a bit higher than what you're proposing. But considering the new allegiance abilities and changes to warscrolls I think they're proportionally in line.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Gallery

Store

Downloads

Blogs

Events

Posts posted by SpiritofHokuto