WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

All discussions related to Warhammer Fantasy Battles from 1st to 8th edition go here, including army construction, comp creation, campaign and scenarios design, etc...
Message
Author
SpellArcher
Green Istari
Posts: 13841
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 11:26 am
Location: Otherworld

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#91 Post by SpellArcher »

Love it!

But where's the dragon?
User avatar
Galharen
Master of Brushes
Posts: 1280
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 5:41 pm
Location: Poznan/Hannover

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#92 Post by Galharen »

Matches perfectly my vision of my high elves so far:)
Makiwara
Chronicler
Posts: 219
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia.

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#93 Post by Makiwara »

The important question is when do the Asrai get some new art work?

=P~
Only in the Dreaming Woods are Mortals truly free, t'was always thus and always thus will be.
Headshot wrote:
Makiwara wrote:Smiths in Nagarythe that can repair the holiest piece of armour worn by the Shadow Prince himself... 0 apparently.
Duct tape counts!!
User avatar
Francis
Posts: 720
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 10:27 pm
Location: Rebuilding Tor Elasor

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#94 Post by Francis »

Just want to chime in and say that I really like what you've done so far Furion. In my mind this is far superior to the 9th edition stuff.

In short I feel that you are improving a fun and excellent edition (8th) even further, while the 9th edition team is turning the game into a rather bland and boring tournament game. 9th feels like a comp pack for ETC gone wild, this feels like Warhammer in all its glory =D> .
Ferny
9th Age Moderator
Posts: 1906
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 12:03 pm

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#95 Post by Ferny »

While I started off of the opinion that too many fan versions would split the pool of gamers (and I still think that to an extent), I'm enjoying this output and it looks like a good game. I haven't looked at 9th Age in much detail but I also like how that looks - I think I'd happily play either.

Furion - if you could spare the time I think the thread would benefit greatly from more input from you. I understand your goal is to make every unit usable, but it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on the specific values you've gone for in your re-balancing. For example, why did you plump for the values you did for loremaster and annointed? Granted if they don't get much play then it makes sense to drop them, but why to the values you chose? I assume you then bumped them up again either on feedback or playtest results - could you say which? And again, what was it about the values you chose which made you choose them. The value you cite of working as a one-man-band is a single vision and an efficient implementation method and therefore fast updates, all of which seems to hold true, but to an outsider the specific values (as opposed to the direction of travel with them) look arbitrary to me.

One of the things which sets your work apart from 9th Age is that you are said to stay truer to 8th and most of the work you've done is I think rebalancing rather than re-working, but with magic in particular there is more reworking. With items that's largely bringing back 7th Ed variety, with spells there's more of your own stuff. I think the points values can be approached quite objectively, but these will necessarily be player/designer preference, from the fluff text to the effects. I would argue that for things like this there's more scope for crowdsourcing/democratizing input. That might very legitimately not be a value you're after in this redesign, but do you feel that the benefits of being a solo designer hold true in this more subjective reworking, and if so could you expand on which benefits they bring to the fore.

Thanks for your efforts - I'm enjoying seeing the progress. (Haven't played a game since before the collapse of 8th though so can't comment from that perspective sadly).
The 9th Age: Alumni

Former Roles: Advisory Board, HR, Moderator and Highborn Elves Army Support
Furion
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:30 am

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#96 Post by Furion »

Pre-finished work. Still some details to do.

Image

Thoughts?
[url=http://www.youtube.com/followfurion][b]FollowFurion[/b] on youtube for in depth WFB tactics analysis (click!)[/url]
Makiwara
Chronicler
Posts: 219
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia.

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#97 Post by Makiwara »

Maybe a saddle on the dragon and some Druchii ships getting burned into the water?

:lol:
Only in the Dreaming Woods are Mortals truly free, t'was always thus and always thus will be.
Headshot wrote:
Makiwara wrote:Smiths in Nagarythe that can repair the holiest piece of armour worn by the Shadow Prince himself... 0 apparently.
Duct tape counts!!
User avatar
Giladis
The Merlord
Posts: 2908
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:13 am
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Contact:

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#98 Post by Giladis »

My first impression was "Look! A flying godzilla!" :mrgreen:

Othewise I like it, a very non Warhammer looking Dragon.
Furion
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:30 am

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#99 Post by Furion »

Huzzah! I was given a very own forum on The Warhammer Forum to further develop my project: WFB Reworked and Rebalanced!
Visit http://warhammer.org.uk/phpBB/viewforum.php?f=106 and be sure to leave a comment!
[url=http://www.youtube.com/followfurion][b]FollowFurion[/b] on youtube for in depth WFB tactics analysis (click!)[/url]
User avatar
Galharen
Master of Brushes
Posts: 1280
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 5:41 pm
Location: Poznan/Hannover

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#100 Post by Galharen »

Looks good so far. :)
User avatar
Seredain
The Cavalry Prince
Posts: 1134
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:27 pm
Location: London, England.

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#101 Post by Seredain »

Comments on Updating 8th Edition High Elves


Thank you Furion for inviting comments on this project which, to my mind at least, carries the great strength of tweaking 8th Ed rather than completely overhauling it (by and large, I thought 8th was a really good warhammer game). Below I put forward some suggestions in respect of your updated High Elf army book. My principle aim is to promote (as you do) alternative army builds but also I’ve made an effort to preserve a real distinction between units within the book (flamespyres, frosties and dragons; princes and annointeds; archmages and loresmasters).

I’ve also tried to be very careful to keep a distinction between the high elf book and other army books. Fluff alone would dictate plenty of improvements to the high elf list which might tread on the toes of other armies, which deserve to have their unique strengths preserved in the wider game. As a huge fan of high elf archers, for example, I nonetheless (grudgingly) accept that giving them magic banners might tread a little heavily on wood elf toes, even if high elf armies are more likely to be laden with magic banners than the asrai in pure fluff terms. Giving shadow warriors great weapons might likewise inappropriately invade a speciality meant to be held only by dark elves.

As far as is possible, I have tried to tread this rather fine line between fluff and meta-game. By and large, you may find that this has led me to embrace the principle of your existing amendments but toning them down slightly. Albeit there are plenty of choices in the 8th Ed book which never get taken and so need improvement, I’ve mostly (I hope) erred on the side of caution, particularly when units as amended have received both improved abilities/upgrades as well as a cost decrease.

Unless stated otherwise, I leave points costs to you (I know it pretty thoroughly but I don’t have an 8th Ed army book in front of me). If I’ve nerfed/buffed a unit below but not mentioned points cost, I allow for the fact that you may wish to amend the cost of that unit to account for my suggestions (assuming you accept any of them, of course).

This is not meant to be a standalone set of suggestions, so any of your updates which I don’t mention below, I would accept as is (albeit I may have missed one or two things). I can’t imagine many players (even elves) would mourn the loss of 2++ on Banner of the World Dragon.

Thanks for reading, and I hope you find these comments helpful.

Best,

Seredain.


Anointed of Asuryan

The thing about the 5+ unit-ward on the anointed is that it dominates the primary purpose of the character – it’s the characteristic which most easily combines with other characters and units to create awesome combos. It’s likely to be seen alongside a high archmage with the book of Hoeth, probably (as is) in a large unit of white lions. Phoenix guard, who have a better ward already, receive no benefit. Meanwhile, the +1 combat res for them, while useful, is of significantly less benefit to them than a 5++ would be to other units. Collectively, therefore, I don’t think the character is likely to be fielded with phoenix guard, which rather goes against your aim.

So I would suggest amending the ward buff (which I agree is needed), in such a way that it benefits phoenix guard as effectively as other units. I would therefore suggest amending Blessings of Asuryan to act as one instance of the shield of Saphery lore attribute, instead of granting a straight 5++. This would give less of an automatic boost to units, but still combine well enough with high magic and parry saves to make him useful in units other than phoenix guard. However, the boost of phoenix guard to a straight 3++ would make him of particular benefit to them, since they wouldn’t need any successful high magic to get them to the best ward save (as they do now) – making anointeds more reliable leaders of phoenix guard

To compensate I would make a few nerfs to the anointed. Firstly, 3++ phoenix guard are powerful enough that they don’t need +1 combat res as well. I would therefore remove the Phoenix Guard Leader rule (which has the added benefit of simplifying things). Secondly, I would not allow his buff to improve his own ward save to a 3+. This would make him too easy to tank when he can also take magic armour. If he wants the 3+ for himself, he needs a high-magic boost. Otherwise I think he should act as a buff-wagon for friendly troops.

Further, the anointed is currently a powerful combat character. He only has 1 fewer attacks than the prince and is able to spend a lot of extra points on a magic weapon and armour because of his native 4++ and MR (2) (which, as items, would cost the prince 75-85 points). If we’re going to improve the priest side of this warrior-priest character, then, I feel we should nerf the warrior side to keep him reasonable and create a stronger distinction from the infantry prince (a more specialist fighting character). I would therefore reduce the anointed’s attacks to 2 and remove the shield option. 100 points of magic items are available for those HE players who wish to invest in better combat abilities (blade of leaping gold would be one choice for this character).

200 points is fair cost, since he doesn’t cast spells and only has two attacks.

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

200 points. Attacks 2. Blessings of Asuryan: other models forming part of the same unit as the anointed of Asuryan gain a 6+ ward save. Models granted ward saves by any other means may add +1 to their ward saves, up to a maximum of 3+. This addition may be made in conjunction with the Shield of Saphery attribute from the lore of High Magic.

Phoenixes

In current 8th rules, I think that frost phoenixes tread on the toes of both flamespyres and dragonriders. Firstly, I think that dragons should be the best combat monsters in the roster, and have unique access to Str 6+. Phoenixes have various magical attributes but should not compete with dragons, or indeed griffons, in terms of brute strength. The latter are the combat monsters. Secondly, I think the frostheart should also be less good at offense than the flamespyre. For me, the Frostheart is a wizened and defensive buff-wagon and the flamespyre is an aggressive, more engergetic (literally) damage-dealing unit. I think this should be reflected in the stats to balance them out since the frostheart has the superior abilities.

Flamespyre

The younger, faster and more aggressive animal should have 4 attacks instead of 3. I would also amend Wake of Fire to generate hits according to the number of ranks or files (whichever is higher) of the unit passed over by the model during the course of its movement (the current ability is useless against large units deployed in 3 ranks even where the phoenix has moved across the unit’s files).

Frostheart

The Frostheart is frozen and so obviously tougher than the flamespyre, but since it contains much less energy, there is no sensible reason why it should be better at making attacks in combat. The primary point of this monster is the strength debuff, not that it should be a combat monster like griffons and dragons. I would amend the Frostheart to have 3 attacks at Str 5, albeit it should retain WS6 and T6 to account for its age and frozen hide. The freeze debuff is good enough to make this unit useful. Points cost I leave to you – personally I think 240 points could still be appropriate to a nerfed phoenix (this frosty will still be just as hard to kill as the old one), but perhaps it would need to be a little bit cheaper to account for the loss of combat strength.

Ashtari I would leave the same – she’s special.

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

Flamespyre: 210-225 points; 4 attacks; Wake of Fire grants D3 hits per rank or file of one unit traversed by the phoenix in its movement phase, whichever is higher.

Frostheart: 220-240 points; 3 attacks, strength 5.

Griffons

Griffons die so easily that they should receive a points cost reduction, but I think 110 points for the fully upgraded beast is much too heap – it’s Str 6 on the charge, ASF, has fly and thunderstomp. To account for its fragility, I think 150 points for the upgraded monster is a better ball-park figure.

Dragons

I think dragons have more of a problem with the frost phoenix’s effectiveness for 240 points than with their own points cost. I don’t think I’d make dragons much cheaper, if at all, since they have breath weapons and very good armour saves. Improving the choice of items for characters riding them should be sufficient incentive to use them (see below). Under these amendments you could field a dragonlord with the star lance, great weapon, armour of Caledor and a 4+ ward save for 100 points – a very decent and fluffy build, but not overpowered. If you still think they need reductions in cost, I’d keep them limited so non-HE players don’t feel too aggrieved.

Dragonmage

The biggest weaknesses of this character in 8th were always that a) he was very expensive for 2 levels of magic, and b) he was both very visible and very easy to kill. This last issue was the chief reason no-one took him.

You’ve solved these problems by boosting his spell selection (plus the option of taking silver wand for a maximum of 4 spells), and opened up fantastic defensive builds for him by allowing him to take armour. I have no problem with this – loremasters can wear armour and cast spells. To acknowledge this significant improvement, however, I would not reduce his points cost much, if at all, below the 8th Ed cost. A dragonmage with silver wand, armour of caledor and golden crown would be an excellent character even at the original points cost.

Also, there is no suggestion in the fluff that this character is trained in combat at all – I would leave him with the 2 attacks and WS 4 on his profile. Being able to wear armour is a good enough upgrade that he can see combat – but that’s all about his dragon. The dragonmage himself shouldn’t be toting as many attacks as a loremaster who has actually trained extensively in combat.

Armour of Caledor

I agree that 50 points made this item a very poor choice and that infantry princes ought to be encouraged to lead their spearelves. However, I think that 25 points is too cheap for a 2+ save and (unlike the old 7th Ed item), a 6+ ward save which can be combined with Shield of Saphery and/or MR to open up good combinations. I would revise the points upwards to 30 points, at least, to prevent champions from using it. Also, the item description should specify that the 2+ save cannot be improved by any means. If the armour’s going to be cheap, it shouldn’t give access to a 1+ save.

Star Lance

I’d reduce it to 25 points. This allows a decent combo on a dragonlord with the armour of Caledor despite the latter’s small cost increase – which I think is more necessary. Out of these items, the armour should be the more expensive.

Blade of Leaping Gold

Str 4 is poor but even so, as amended, this is a powerful sword. It’s less good against the tough stuff (1.04 wounds against T6, compared with the giant blade’s 2.38 wounds), but is excellent against low toughness units (4 wounds against T3), and absolutely superb against characters with 1+rr saves. The 70 points price tag doesn’t allow the prince to take excellent defence as well as the talisman of Loec, so it does prevent ridiculous prince builds. However, dark elf dreadlords might still complain, since they stand to get very badly hurt by this item.

I would therefore increase the cost to 75 points in order to prevent princes taking both the sword and the armour of Caledor or else the dawnstone + enchanted shield on a cavalry prince. If the high elf prince wants to go full super-fast armour-penetrating, he should sacrifice a little of his own armour as against the common item builds. I do not think princes should be able to both wield this sword and turn themselves into tanks. Even at 75 points, we have plenty of items with which to add defence. For example, this sword combined with the shield of the merwyrm and the talisman of Loec would be an excellent, and fluffy, build for a martial arts infantry prince.

Dragon Princes

In pure fluff terms, I agree that dragon princes should really be str 4. They are the foremost of Ulthuan’s warriors, great heroes etc etc. However, I think that making them str 4 would be treading on Bretonnian toes a little too much, not to mention chaos knights and indeed other HE elite units. They would also smash cold one knights out of the park.

If you were going to promote princes to str 4, I think they’d have to be more expensive (it’s a huge buff and they were ok value even when Str3 at 29 points each). Instead, however, I’d only increase the strength of the Drakemaster to 4, and leave the knights at Str 3. The champion can take the star lance already and then, at least, the leaders of the dragon princes would be heroic warriors and be armed accordingly, as is fluffy. The star lance makes a significant difference against enemy armour and, now, you can also give your drakemaster the potion of foolhardiness. I think this small amendment would improve the dragon princes’ options but be more conciliatory to other army books which are supposed to have the heaviest heavy cavalry. M9 elite cavalry should be a potent striking force but perhaps have less grinding ability than the slower, heavier knight units of other races.

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

Drakemaster Str 4 for + 12 points. May be equipped with up to 50 points of items.

Banner of Ellyrion

If you wanted to give high elf cavalry something, give them this banner from 7th Ed for 15-25 points. The bearer’s unit does not roll for dangerous terrain. Uniquely high elfy, gives us something good for our knights but doesn’t tread on toes.

The banner of sorcery and Annulian crystal

I agree that high elves should have some sort of unique access to dice-generation, being the world’s expert channellers, creators of the Vortex etc. However, 8thEd made dice generation almost extinct, and other players may resent the enormous potential of the new high elf magic face in attack and defence if we can take the banner of sorcery and Anullian crystal as well as the book of Hoeth and banner of the World Dragon, just as their own armies have lost the ability to throw 6 dice.

I would therefore lose one of these items. Since the Annulian crystal adds yet more defence on top of the MR and ward saves brought to high elves by the 8th Ed book, I’d probably lose that and keep the Banner of Sorcery. If you wanted to give HE a little pip of extra magic defence, however (since it’s fluffy), you could change the Banner of Sorcery to allow the controlling player to choose, at the beginning of his magic phase, whether he will generate a power dice or a dispel dice that turn. 30 points feels right in any case – the important thing is that it can’t be taken by core troops.

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

Add Banner of Sorcery as per your amendment. Optional: allow controlling player to choose, at the beginning of his magic phase, whether to generate a power dice or a dispel dice that turn (30-35 points).

Do not add Annulian Crystal to the roster.

Talisman of Loec

As a devotee of this item back in 7th Ed, I couldn’t be happier than to see it back in our roster. It would open up very decent builds for princes. To prevent it being OP, however, I’d explicitly state that it only affects saves made against the character’s attacks, not his mount, other models attacking the same enemy, etc.

Dark elf characters might complain that this item treads on their toes. Currently they get very good defence with sea dragon cloaks, so that wouldn’t bother me. If you’ve nerfed seadragon cloaks, however (perhaps by making them the same as white lion cloaks), it might look unsporting to give us access to this item as well. I confess I haven’t checked the amended DE roster.

My suggested amendment:

One use only. This item is used at the start of any close combat phase. The bearer may re-roll all rolls to hit and wound until the end of the phase. Before the end of the phase, any enemy model making saves of any kind against wounds caused by the bearer must re-roll all successful saves. At the end of the phase, the bearer suffers one wound with no saves allowed of any kind.

Silver Wand

I don’t think the loremasters should have access to any high magic spells. Firstly, two more spells for 10 points is a little cheeky. Secondly, I think we shouldn’t create yet another model who can generate ward saves for units – we already have mages, archmages, anointeds, two magic rings and a standard, plus ward saves on phoenix guard and dragon armour, and parry saves on swordmasters. Finally, from a fluff perspective, the study of true magic should be reserved for the specialists. The loremaster is a jack of all trades character.

I would therefore restrict the silver wand to mages, dragonmages and archmages only and remove the rule concerning the loremaster.

Vambraces of Defence

This is a wonderful item but I think non-HE players would reasonably protest if we got yet another truly top-class item in addition to the book of Hoeth, banner of the world dragon (even at 3++), and the amended blade of leaping gold. We have access to good armour saves (especially with the amended armour of Caledor), 4+ ward items, dawnstone, dragon armour and high magic. I don’t think we need this item to give us another tank build – tank character-spamming should probably be left to chaos warriors and dwarfs. Other players might particularly resent a dragonlord with 2+rr and 4++ as being a little too solid.

I would remove this item.

Gem of Sunfire

I think the first main problem with the 8th Ed item was that it was a dragonmage gimmick item. It was useless in any other context. That’s the problem I would address, I think. You’ve improved the dragonmage already by granting him an extra spell – next I would make the item more useful to other units. I don’t think the gem itself should generate flaming attacks, however. That’s a bit much for 20 points given the potential it has on monster riders. I think the gem should remain limited to boosting flaming attacks which already exist, not itself granting the Flaming Attacks special rule.

However, I would extent the item’s effect to the bearer and his unit. That way you could combine it with the banner of eternal flame to create some good combos for units like helms, dragon princes, spearmen and seaguard, as well as using it for fire mages.

This extends the number of unit options for the item beyond the dragonmage, but is less extreme and requires the additional investment of the banner slot to make the combos work. Dragon mages with access to extra spells and power dice generation items should get more out of the gem of sunfire than in 8th Ed, even if it doesn’t affect their dragons’ combat attacks.

The second big problem with the 8th Ed item was the timing of activation. No time is specified by the gem so, technically, you could roll your fireball casting dice, roll to wound and then
suddenly choose to activate the gem. You’d be a bit of a douche, but you could do it. Timing needs clearing up.

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

20 points. One use only. This gem may be activated at the beginning of any phase. For the duration of that player turn, the bearer and his unit may add +1 to wound when resolving all spells, shooting and close combat attacks which have the Flaming Attacks special rule.


High magic

Shield of Aenarion

The new Shield spell is, I think, overdoing the ward saves a little alongside the banner of the world dragon, shield of Saphery, anointeds, dragon armour, phoenix guard, phoenixes, parry saves, talismans etc. Given the number of models in our list which can have some form of ward already, teleporting ward buffs all over the place without putting the mage himself at risk (normally he has to deploy with that unit), or risking miscasts in the target unit (both of which keep Shield of Saphery reasonable) is, I think, too powerful (particularly the potential to shift Saphery buffs onto monsters and solo characters). I think it’s a bit too much ward save action.

Tempest

I agree that the old Tempest spell was totally pointless, but I think it only required a very simple fix – to switch the wording so that any unit hit, not wounded, by the template suffers the shooting nerf. As amended, the spell slots into the rest of the lore as originally intended and would see action against gunlines, especially with the silver wand in play, since it now works properly against war machines. With reference to the 10+ Iceshard Blizzard, the casting value feels fair at 11+ - it inflicts damage but has targeting restrictions as a direct damage spell, doesn’t nerf leadership and has the shorter range.

Some people may ask that this spell be turned into a hex, but I would not. The damage element is integral to the original spell, and a hex version would copy Iceshard Blizzard too closely and so undermine the lore of Heavens. High magic brings plenty of defence already if the lore attribute is used effectively, so can live without a hex (hexes are in any case more of a dark elf thing).

Spearmen and Seaguard

Spear-armed elves are the heart and soul of the high elf army book (dark elves have repeater crossbows as their thing, wood elves get archers) and definitely need improving.

Spears in the WHFB Rulebook

Firstly, spears are rather poor weapons in the 8th rulebook and don’t behave as they historically should – as good defensive weapons against cavalry. +2 Initiative for them seems sensible, as would granting +1 Str when receiving a charge (to the front only), from cavalry, monstrous cavalry, monstrous beasts or monsters. Men riding horses get +1 strength on the charge, it makes perfect sense that the spears they’re charging into would hit them at +1 strength too. You’ve all seen Braveheart and played Total War.

Spearmen/Seaguard in the high elf book

I think the heavy armour upgrade is a good thing and would extend it to seaguard too (as ithilmar). In fluff terms, at least some spearmen/seaguard are well equipped veteran line infantry – the principes or hoplites of the high elf army – and should have the appropriate equipment options. However, high elves are not a heavily armoured race, the seaguard must crew their ships and so wear lighter armour, but ithilmar is quite rare and we don’t want to tread on dwarven toes.

I’d therefore limit access to heavy armour by incorporating it into an amended First Among Equals rule – i.e. that one unit of spearmen or seaguard in the army may upgrade their light armour for heavy armour for +1 point per model and may take a magic banner worth up to 25 points. I would also allow the champion of this unit to take magic items worth up to 25 points as the leader of your veterans. Collectively, these upgrades would allow you to field one unit of solid spear-armed infantry, with some good magic combos available, as long as you were willing to pay for it.

I would not, however make spearmen cheap horde infantry, which would tread on the toes of true horde armies. In fluff terms, high elves are not populous and so should not have an abundance of cheap troops. I think spearmen and seaguard deserve to be good, but should remain pretty pricey (the rulebook spear upgrade is an important consideration in this context).

I would therefore suggest reducing the cost of spearmen and seaguard by 1 point from their 8th Ed base. The spear upgrades and the available item combinations make these units much more viable for the points. I would even consider leaving the base 8th Ed points costs alone entirely given the suggested rulebook updates for spears. Seaguard, in particular, shouldn’t be too cheap because they have bows.

Summary change from 8th Ed books

Spears (all races): +2 Initiative. When spear-armed models receive a charge from cavalry, monstrous cavalry, monstrous beasts or monsters, to the front only, they receive +1 strength for that round of combat.

Spearmen: 8-9 points.

Seaguard: 11-12 points. May be equipped with shields for +1 point per model.

Spearmen and Seaguard: First among equals: one unit of spearmen or seaguard may be equipped with heavy armour for +1 point per model. The standard bearer and champion of the same unit may respectively be equipped with a magic standard and magic item each worth up to 25 points.

Silver helms

These knights are the young nobles of Ulthuan. I would give them their own first among equals rule – allowing one unit to take a magic banner worth up to 25 points. This would be in addition to the First Among Equals rule for spears and seaguard.Although silver helms should certainly have access to a small magic banner, they shouldn’t discourage the fielding of spearmen units by taking their flag.

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

First among equals: one unit of silver helms may be equipped with a magic standard worth up to 25 points.

Ellyrian Reavers

Reavers are also of knightly rank, so I would allow them to take ithilmar barding for +2 points per model. This puts them in proper competition with dark riders (albeit the latter’s crossbows are better), and fits the models which clearly have barding sculpted on them. +2 points per model is a fair price.

Tiranoc chariots

I agree in principle that these should be in core – they are of the same rank as silver helms and reavers. However, I’m conscious that being able to spam chariots is one of the tomb kings’ specialties, and shouldn’t be handed to other armies to the same degree (core chariots in chaos armies have not been an 8th Ed success story). High elves are first and foremost an army based on the levies, and core chariots would certainly work against that. Also, fluff wise, Tiranoc chariots are distinctly regional in a way which silver helms and reavers are not (the former are ubiquitous, the latter roam around everywhere).

I would therefore limit the number of Tiranoc chariot units in Core to the number of spearmen and archer units combined. Chariot units beyond this number count as special choices.

A little fiddly, perhaps, but necessary I think to keep core chariots in check. Otherwise, as an alternative, I’d rather leave them in special, make them a bit cheaper and maybe allow a heavy armour upgrade for +1 save (since they’re silver helm-class fighters).

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

Remain listed under Special Units. One unit of Tiranoc chariots may be taken as a Core Unit choice for each unit of spearmen and archers in the army.

Characters on chariots

Is a Tiranoc Chariot mount meant to cost only 5 points for a mage? For all characters who can ride one, I would keep chariot mounts the same as the base unit cost.

Since they can wear lion cloaks, I think princes and nobles should be allowed to ride in lion chariots. This way people can expressly field a stubborn Chracian prince even though we lack a specialist white lion character.

Since high elf chariots have no scythes, I think that any character riding a chariot should be allowed to join a unit of 1-3 chariots.

Lion Chariots

I appreciate that these units need a boost but I don’t think that high elf non-monster units should be T5. We’re not a tough army, but even so are already very able to spam T5+ monster models in our rare unit and character choices. Being able to spam T5 in special as well would be too much, I think. For me, T5 chariots should be restricted to the heavier sorts of machines used by orcs, beastmen and chaos warriors. I do not think that dark elf chariots should be T5 either (albeit they too should become cheaper).

Stats wise I would leave this unit alone, and look only at the cost. 95 points is quite a big drop so I think I would price lion chariots at 100-105 points and just look at improving their options by allowing them to form units of 1-3.

That would fit with Tiranoc chariots (including the fact that neither model has scythes), and fit with the organised character of the army. It would also, especially if a character was joined to the unit, make these chariots a better target for friendly spells, opening up more synergies through combat buffs alongside magic weapons etc.

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

100-105 points. Unit size: 1-3.

Shadow warriors

I would allow shadow warriors to be equipped with shields and extra hand weapons (no reason why not, fluffwise), but would reduce their 8th Ed base cost by only 1 point. An increase in the options available to shadow warriors is desirable but, since they’re scouts, a significant reduction in points cost together with an increase in options would be too much, I think. They’re much better than archers already, and having access to more inventive items (like the ring of fury), increases their usefulness. That’s fluffy – high elves have good access to items. But, when it comes to scouts, we want to compete but not tread on the toes of dark elves and wood elves. In particular, great weapons should I think not be available to shadow warriors. High strength shouldn’t be too easily available for defensive high elves, as compared with the dark elves who specialize in this sort of thing.

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

11 points per model. The unit may be equipped with shields for +1 point per model, and extra hand weapons for +1 point per model. Shadow walkers may be equipped with a magic item worth up to 25 points.

Loremasters

I love the loremaster but, really, I don’t think he needs to become more powerful or less expensive. Plenty of elf players use loremasters already (I use one in my own list): he’s an excellent utility caster and a good combat character (with the ability to wear armour) in one package.

Extra magic levels

Firstly, having access to the level 4 upgrade is a unique distinction for the archmage – the principle compensation for only getting 4 spells to the loremaster’s 8. A level 4 upgrade to the loremaster would, I think, invade the archmage’s territory too much (not to mention slann territory), and could give high elves an OP magic phase when taken in addition to the new dice generation item(s). Finally, in fluff terms, to possess both combat ability and spell-casting is traditionally seen as something only the great elves of yore were capable of (Caledor Dragontamer etc). The combination should, therefore, be kept within limits for modern non-special characters.

Swordmaster Leader

I agree that the anointed should have a rule encouraging him to captain a unit of phoenix guard, but I don’t agree that loremasters should receive the same benefit. Loremasters and swordmasters are more individualistic than the fixed regiments of white lions and phoenix guard standing in defence of princes and temple-fortresses. Swordmasters roam the land acting as agents for the White Tower, and only gather to form regiments when there is particular need. The loremasters, meanwhile, are engaged in their own studies of combat and magic – not in leadership (which I think should in any case be left to princes).

If you want to help swordmasters, then, I would remove this rule entirely and amend the swordmasters directly instead. I’d leave the loremaster exactly as he is in the 8th Ed book, including points cost, except that he should lose Deflect Shots and gain the Art of War special rule described below (he’s trained as a swordmaster, after all).

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

Replace the Deflect Shots special rule with the The Art of War special rule (see below).

Swordmasters

Swordmasters are supposed to be the most skilled fighting troops in the army but in, 8th Ed, their special rule apes something already possessed by white lions – shooting resistance. GW likes Jedi, I suppose, but this isn’t a good fit to the fluff. In fluff terms, swordmasters are primarily intended to be very skilled melee specialists. They should be good and accurate with their swords. Although giving them true ASF would go against 8th Ed’s sensible distinction between slower great weapons and faster halberds, a limited re-roll would work. I think this would be more appropriate than WS7, because elf lords should still be hitting swordmasters on 3s, and WS7 would mean that WS3 troops would always be hitting the swordmasters only on 5s which, I feel, is powerful enough that it should require magical assistance from Hand of Glory.

I do agree that the parry save should be available for close combat (it’s more important in game terms and fluff terms), but I wouldn’t give swordmasters the save against shooting – that’s a fluffy weakness for them to have and should be left to the more defensive and regimental units like white lions and phoenix guard.

Swordmasters should be expensive, as true elites, and stay on a par with white lions.

Summary change from 8th Ed army book

Initiative 6. Replace the Deflect Shots special rule with the following:

The Art of War: When making attacks in close combat, swordmasters may re-roll hit rolls of a 1. In addition they benefit from 6+ parry save if they are fighting in close combat with great weapons, as if they were equipped with hand weapons and shields.
Last edited by Seredain on Mon Sep 14, 2015 8:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Cavalry Prince - List Design, Tactics, Battle Reports

http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=76&t=33584
SpellArcher
Green Istari
Posts: 13841
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 11:26 am
Location: Otherworld

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#102 Post by SpellArcher »

First up, I have to say I'm even less a guy who's interested in the mechanics of rules changes. I tend to be more interested in taking a ruleset and seeing how it works. But I tend to agree with most of Seredain's points. Not sure about cutting the Anointed to two attacks but it's true he does come with advantages over the Prince, at least on foot.

As Seredain says, the Frostheart is a formidable blocker and already hard to hurt. I'm not sure how far cutting his offensive power would compromise this. On the one hand, putting the odd kill on helps make passing those break tests easier. On the other, yes perhaps the S6 Thunderstomp is just too destructive.

Doesn't the Dragon Mage come with an armour option already? I've also seen Gem of Sunfire on Loremasters and High Mages as well as this guy.

Like the 'elite spears' idea. I think a lot of HE players have been disappointed that these guys have tended to be cannon fodder. Not so sure on the Swordmasters. While I like the theory of them being a glass cannon, I'm not sure how often they'd get to meaningful combat without at least something beyond a 5+ AS. Especially considering the limitations of M5 infantry against the hosts of flyers and fast cav around.
User avatar
Seredain
The Cavalry Prince
Posts: 1134
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 7:27 pm
Location: London, England.

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#103 Post by Seredain »

SpellArcher wrote:First up, I have to say I'm even less a guy who's interested in the mechanics of rules changes. I tend to be more interested in taking a ruleset and seeing how it works. But I tend to agree with most of Seredain's points. Not sure about cutting the Anointed to two attacks but it's true he does come with advantages over the Prince, at least on foot.

As Seredain says, the Frostheart is a formidable blocker and already hard to hurt. I'm not sure how far cutting his offensive power would compromise this. On the one hand, putting the odd kill on helps make passing those break tests easier. On the other, yes perhaps the S6 Thunderstomp is just too destructive.

Doesn't the Dragon Mage come with an armour option already? I've also seen Gem of Sunfire on Loremasters and High Mages as well as this guy.

Like the 'elite spears' idea. I think a lot of HE players have been disappointed that these guys have tended to be cannon fodder. Not so sure on the Swordmasters. While I like the theory of them being a glass cannon, I'm not sure how often they'd get to meaningful combat without at least something beyond a 5+ AS. Especially considering the limitations of M5 infantry against the hosts of flyers and fast cav around.
Hey SA,

The anointed is tricky, isn’t he. I think 3 attacks can be sold for him, but by adding +1 ward to his unit instead of 6++ he's much much better than before for building buff-combos on infantry – and that’s why people will take him where they’re looking to field big infantry units. Add in a high mage or archmage, maybe a bound spell on the champion, and it's easy to get good ward saves on any unit in the book. And with banner of sorcery in the list, and silver wand to increase our access to cheap high spells, by increments we just got significantly better at buffing wards with cheap spells. Two high casts alongside this character would give a 4+ ward save and 3+ parry save on swordmasters, plus the magic res. Phoenix guard getting their 3++ without any magic at all is fabulously reliable. The anointed being a little cheaper makes him more useful for these sorts of combinations. Certainly there's a good argument for keeping 3 attacks on him - he's a lord level character - but I think he'd need to go back up in points. Even then I would worry slightly that a lord this good for infantry units who also sported 3 attacks would be in danger of putting foot princes in the shade, and irritating other players. Perhaps I’m being too cautious.

I’m much less concerned about the change to swordmasters. They have lost a parry save vs shooting (a rather specific form of defence), but gained access, as mentioned above, to the improved set of magical defences summarised above as well as items on the Bladelord (for Ironcurse icon, a bound spell, etc). We’re very good at tanking up a unit of 5+ save troops, even with only the 3++ Banner. We also have, in this amended roster, more tools for dealing with enemy shooting units. In fact we can deal with enemy fast cavalry, BS troops (the only shooting which 8th swordmasters got 6++ against), and most flyers quite well already with our own archers, bolt throwers, magic, core heavy cavalry and characters. And, as amended, the potency of these options is improved, albeit at a price – knights with the banner of Ellyrion could advance under cover, reavers resist shooting better, Tempest would actually work against war machines, heavy-armoured seaguard could move up and unleash a hail of flaming arrows wounding on 3s (gem of sunfire), safe in the knowledge that, thanks to the amended seahelm, they will be steadfast against a countercharge. Shadow warriors have better options. Flamespyre phoenixes are more damaging and possibly cheaper. Skycutters are cheaper. Griffons are much cheaper. Even the frostheart has good claim to be cheaper if he’s only 3 attacks at Str5. If Furion’s current points amendments stick, so too are dragons. And chariots are now in core. We even got another magic bow and the talisman of Loec for our princes – both excellent anti-monster weapons.

Individually these aren’t massive changes but collectively constitute a significant improvement in the ability of our army to produce builds which counter enemy shooting and flyers. Some of these units have taken a nerf – the frostheart in particular, and we lost the 2++ ward save against wood elves. But with our improved core and magic/item options there’s plenty of room in this tapestry for a dedicated melee unit – and plenty of scope for protecting it both directly (though ward saves) and indirectly (through other units).

At the same time, these amended swordmasters are significantly better in combat. This is more important, as high magic is much worse at buffing units in combat than it is affecting the support or ranged war. Similarly, our core units are good at taking out shooters but rather worse at taking out elite enemy combat troops. There is a niche to be filled, here. The swordmaster amendments in this context are minor but significant. Initiative 6 matters a great deal because it means striking before any other great weapon unit in the game, striking before chaos warriors (a big step up) and denying re-rolls from Initiative 5 ASF units, fielded by every elf army and so dangerous to white lions in combat (again, a big step up). Then you have the parry save which, with an anointed in the unit, for instance, would be a 5++ minimum. Swordmasters’ defence in combat (where they’re supposed to be) is therefore very greatly improved against a wide variety of elite opposition and, in attack, of course, they’re obviously more potent from being able to re-roll 1s.

So this is a greatly improved melee unit, and fluffy too. But in game terms I also think it’s enough. Swordmasters shouldn’t be both good in combat and vs shooting for 13 points per model, and shouldn’t be more expensive than phoenix guard, and shouldn’t try and do something which our other elites already specialise in, hence I’d drop the deflect shots rule. If players want shooting defence on their infantry, they’re not going to choose 8th Ed swordmasters anyway – they’re going to take phoenix guard or white lions. But if players of the amended book wanted a superior melee unit and were happy to use the synergies offered by the rest of the roster to protect them on their way into combat (which we can certainly do), then I think they’d enjoy this unit.

Thanks!
S
The Cavalry Prince - List Design, Tactics, Battle Reports

http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=76&t=33584
User avatar
Ielthan
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:33 am
Location: Saphery

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#104 Post by Ielthan »

Personally always felt that dragon princes should be 1 attack, strength 4 and have the devastating charge special rule. 2 attacks strength 4 is great, but throw in rerolls and the razor standard (don't really need botwd if you can give them mr3) and I could definitely see Bretonnian/Chaos players having a problem.

Regarding spears, in warhammer ancient battles cavalry simply could not charge units with the phalanx special rule in the front, to represent horses non-suicidal nature. Similarly in Napoleonic systems line infantry usually must form squares as soon as cavalry gets anywhere near them. In square formation they receive enormous bonuses vs cavalry (but are more vulnerable to artillery and have significantly reduced firepower themselves).
Daeron
Scotty? Laforge? Kaylee? Engy? Evil Wrench?
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 10:47 pm

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#105 Post by Daeron »

I checked the dark elf changes and wonder about the following points:
- Fleetmaster, his sacrifice ability gives +2 movement only to the Corsairs in the unit. So the Fleetmaster doesn't get the buff and will still restrict the unit to M5 rendering the ability useless on the charge. The only scenario in which this can be beneficial is when the character leaves the unit, which means the benefit of WS, ini and stubborn are lost. Is this intended?
- Banner of Cold Blood affects all units. Does that include enemy units?
- Web of Shadows, doesn't state a single use only. This is intended to be reusable in every close combat phase?
- The dragon is made cheaper for the Sorceress but not the Dreadlord. Correct? (I get this one)
- The Manticore is made 50pts cheaper for Dreadlord and Beastmaster, but not for the Sorceress. Correct? (But I don't get this one)
- Cold one Chariot costs 115pts. It's marked as a change, but it is the same cost as before.
- Dark Riders cost 16pts. It's marked as a change, but it's the same cost as before.

PS: made a discussion topic on this for the Dark Elves here:
http://druchii.net/viewtopic.php?f=176&t=77120
Oops
Furion
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 11:30 am

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#106 Post by Furion »

I am sure there is tons of hype (either yay or boohiss) for 9th Age getting to ETC, however I am still working on my project.

I recently completed Dogs of War armybook. I like the result, and I absolutely love the cover:
Image
Link to download is here (click) as well as in 1st post.

What do you guys think?
[url=http://www.youtube.com/followfurion][b]FollowFurion[/b] on youtube for in depth WFB tactics analysis (click!)[/url]
Shannar, Sealord
Very Helpful Elf
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 2:10 am
Location: Patroling the Sea Lanes

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#107 Post by Shannar, Sealord »

Glad to seeyou are still working on this.
User avatar
Ielthan
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:33 am
Location: Saphery

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#108 Post by Ielthan »

Great work, absolutely loved this book, very tempted to buy some historical pikemen and do this list.
User avatar
RE.Lee
Posts: 2618
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 9:22 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#109 Post by RE.Lee »

Cheers for all the work you're doing, seeing Malakai's Goblin Hewer brings a tear to my eye ;)
cheers, Lee

Elven Field Surgeon, Department of Intensive Care, Resuscitation and Necromancy
User avatar
Ielthan
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:33 am
Location: Saphery

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#110 Post by Ielthan »

RE.Lee wrote:Cheers for all the work you're doing, seeing Malakai's Goblin Hewer brings a tear to my eye ;)
^^ I immediately looked up how much they go for on ebay, loved that model. Doomseekers would be awesome too, they were so op iirc. Would love a few more of the regiments of reknown if possible, Al Muktar's Desert Dogs would be cool. Furion did you look at the warhammer armies project at all when writing this?
User avatar
RE.Lee
Posts: 2618
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 9:22 pm
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#111 Post by RE.Lee »

Just got word of a nearby shop starting a league using your ruleset. Some people want to change it to 9th age... Hope they don't succeed :twisted: Waiting for Skaven!
cheers, Lee

Elven Field Surgeon, Department of Intensive Care, Resuscitation and Necromancy
User avatar
Prince of Spires
Auctor Aeternitatum
Posts: 8249
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:07 pm
Location: The city of Spires

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#112 Post by Prince of Spires »

Moved to the Warhammer Mods forum.
For Nagarythe: Come to the dark side.
PS: Bring cookies!

Check out my plog
Painting progress, done/in progress/in box: 167/33/91

Check my writing blog for stories on the Prince of Spires and other pieces of fiction.
User avatar
Francis
Posts: 720
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 10:27 pm
Location: Rebuilding Tor Elasor

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#113 Post by Francis »

Any movement on this project? I kinda wish that this rather than 9th would have been picked up by most warhammer players.
Folomo
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 3:27 pm

Re: WFB: Reworked and Rebalanced

#114 Post by Folomo »

AFAIK, Furion is playing 9th Age now, so I doubt this proyect will be continued.
Post Reply