 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Wolf Man
D-Company Members
| Joined: | Wed Apr 27th, 2005 |
| Location: | Sector Obscurus, Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 3097 |
| 40k Armies played: | Space Wolves - all other armies are for support |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Tue Feb 10th, 2009 09:27 pm |
|
Pen dull wrote: But I get your point. What I was saying was: the characters matter little.
So how many games do you play with New Orks where you do NOT take at least one Special Character (or someone who 'counts as' one of them)???
Because every game i've played with my orks (admittedly few) i've taken at least one if not two (or three in the case of Snikrot and jumppack guy) special characters.
In nearly every game I've played against New Orks, or even just witnessed a game wherein they are involved, I've noticed the Orks have at least one special character in their list.
And I think that this is exactly Jay's (and my) point.
How many Ork armies out there don't use any Special Characters in their lists? How many marine armies don't use any Special Characters in their lists? And are those armies in greater or fewer number than they were before their new codex was released? I say they are fewer in number than they were prior to the new 'dex.
And when this IG book comes out, how much do you want to bet that in order to field a "Valhallan" army you'll have to take some Special Valhallan Character which offers "big, fluffy coats" or "resistance to cold" or some such characteristic. Maybe you'll have to take "Rambo" to field Catachans or something.
CT can say his army is Salamanders, but he has to field Vulcan to use their traits.
White Scars is the same, yes?
I think that blows.
____________________
With these paws, I thee type, for Russ.
|
Professor Chaos
D-Company Members
| Joined: | Wed Apr 6th, 2005 |
| Location: | Brewcity, Wisconsin USA |
| Posts: | 696 |
| 40k Armies played: | Chaos Space Marines, Chaos Deamons, Imperial Guard |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Feb 10th, 2009 11:02 pm |
|
Wolf Man wrote: Pen dull wrote: But I get your point. What I was saying was: the characters matter little.
So how many games do you play with New Orks where you do NOT take at least one Special Character (or someone who 'counts as' one of them)???
Because every game i've played with my orks (admittedly few) i've taken at least one if not two (or three in the case of Snikrot and jumppack guy) special characters.
In nearly every game I've played against New Orks, or even just witnessed a game wherein they are involved, I've noticed the Orks have at least one special character in their list.
And I think that this is exactly Jay's (and my) point.
How many Ork armies out there don't use any Special Characters in their lists? How many marine armies don't use any Special Characters in their lists? And are those armies in greater or fewer number than they were before their new codex was released? I say they are fewer in number than they were prior to the new 'dex.
And when this IG book comes out, how much do you want to bet that in order to field a "Valhallan" army you'll have to take some Special Valhallan Character which offers "big, fluffy coats" or "resistance to cold" or some such characteristic. Maybe you'll have to take "Rambo" to field Catachans or something.
CT can say his army is Salamanders, but he has to field Vulcan to use their traits.
White Scars is the same, yes?
I think that blows.
Codex Creep, Rules Revamp, Repeat.
____________________
"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid." Han Solo
|
Major_Slovak
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Wed Aug 3rd, 2005 |
| Location: | Zombie |
| Posts: | 1091 |
| 40k Armies played: | non-Imperial imperial guard, weird orks |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Feb 11th, 2009 12:43 am |
|
Wolf Man wrote:
I think that blows.
I agree. I really like the inclusion of Special Characters in the game, like Col. Schaffer or Commissar Yarrick have been included in the Guard for some time among others. . . but they are historical figures. And as such it is really stupid and disrespectful to the backstory to insist that they participate in anything less than a mega-apocalypse type battle.
Did General Patton take part in every little skirmish between a handful of Germans with a halftrack and some GIs with a Sherman? No, and if he had he wouldn't be Patton, he'd be common as dirt.
I would probably be okay with it if they had just called the special characters by some other name that didn't prostitute the backstory, because I don't think it's necessarily a bad game design ploy. It basically does what Apocalypse does, which is mandate formations by giving you certain advantages for playing a set piece force. It's very British, militarily and organizationally.
It also makes the game designers job easier because they don't have to necessarily test out two triilion different combinations of characters/units/wargear (like in the previous Chaos Codex) for problems, they can steer a big chunk of the points for your list in some more or less predictable direction.
I prefer having complete flexibility though, but if they're going to insist on formations (defined by characters) then why not just call Snikrot a Kommando Kaptain or something? I dislike the way they are going because they're pushing this sort of fake superhero universe, which goes directly against the "millions of inhabited planets" theme that is so cool about 40k.
____________________
"These fragments I have shored against my ruin." Eliot
|
Pen dull
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Wed Apr 13th, 2005 |
| Location: | Madison, Wisconsin USA |
| Posts: | 1936 |
| 40k Armies played: | 12+k Orks 2+k Marines 1k Eldar. |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Feb 11th, 2009 12:47 am |
|
I get what you're saying. Admittedly, I say that I do use the Ork special characters. But don't you think that in general this is where GW is headed? They are making special characters instead of wargear or traits that give an army a particular ability. They are trying to encourage fluffly lists I think.
HOWEVER, when I say that the special characters mean little, I mean it. A good ork army can whup up any tournament army without a single special character on the board, simply because nothing in the dex is better than a mixed-wargear Nobz squad on bikes.
Also, I've been playing with my marines quite a bit and have yet to use a special character. I even have a marneus calgar figure, and right now he lies disassembled.
I think it can be done, and good players will get it done. Overall, GW wanted people to play with characters since they were making models for them that went at a higher markup than other "standard model" models. And since special characters were never allowed at competitive tournaments, now suddenly you can have them.
And then every swingin' dick in the country buys a Marneus and a Ghazghkull.
Ka-fucking-ching.
____________________
"How is that even possible?!?"- Milkman
"Everybody can take all summer to build one flyer a piece.... Bam instant flying retard fest." - joe
"When you die, I'm gonna cry a little." - Derling
|
ethmongul
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Wed Feb 11th, 2009 01:07 am |
|
I have no speshul karackters in my ork army,da only one I'es evers yousded is dat stoopid kaptain baddokk(an hes sucks dog crap,alongs wit dem stoopid flash gits)However,I do 'ave gaz an mad dok all painted up,but I'es jus don get to play in games where dey ares needed(over 6000pts which is where I think these two would really show what shitty special character powers are.)I mean,wies takes stoopid ghazkull in anything less dan 5000 pts,yous could gets another 30 ork squad with a frekin powerklaw nob out der for da same points.Nah, Ie's tries to takes more'o'dem nobs whenever possible.Da frekin beakies an humies,an da stoopid pointy eared freaks get sooooo mad,an call ya cheezy,an all kinds'o'udder things cause dey just don know dat da frekin orks rule!
____________________
Makin' it up as I go along!
"A man who maketh the same mistake twice is like a dog going back to its own vomit."-Pendull
|
Major_Slovak
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Wed Aug 3rd, 2005 |
| Location: | Zombie |
| Posts: | 1091 |
| 40k Armies played: | non-Imperial imperial guard, weird orks |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Feb 11th, 2009 02:13 am |
|
| HA!
____________________
"These fragments I have shored against my ruin." Eliot
|
Pen dull
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Wed Apr 13th, 2005 |
| Location: | Madison, Wisconsin USA |
| Posts: | 1936 |
| 40k Armies played: | 12+k Orks 2+k Marines 1k Eldar. |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Feb 11th, 2009 06:20 pm |
|
Centurian said this on dakka. I met the guy at Adepticon once, he seemed quite level-headed. So this isn't one of those extremist dakka weirdos.
Face it...5th Edition 40K is all about using Special Characters to theme your army. There's no way around it...if you want to run an army that's different than the stock army list, you HAVE to use special characters. Holding a prejudice against them is severely unfair and a ridiculous holdover from previous editions. You're not playing 40K 3, or 40K 4...you're playing 40K 5 now. It's time to make a change.
Here is the post: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/229331.page
Alot of the people are crap, but there are a few snippets there in the first few pages that I think make some valid points.
____________________
"How is that even possible?!?"- Milkman
"Everybody can take all summer to build one flyer a piece.... Bam instant flying retard fest." - joe
"When you die, I'm gonna cry a little." - Derling
|
Pen dull
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Wed Apr 13th, 2005 |
| Location: | Madison, Wisconsin USA |
| Posts: | 1936 |
| 40k Armies played: | 12+k Orks 2+k Marines 1k Eldar. |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Feb 11th, 2009 06:31 pm |
|
Major_Slovak wrote:
I prefer having complete flexibility though, but if they're going to insist on formations (defined by characters) then why not just call Snikrot a Kommando Kaptain or something? I dislike the way they are going because they're pushing this sort of fake superhero universe, which goes directly against the "millions of inhabited planets" theme that is so cool about 40k.
Whenever I field Ghaz, I call him "The New Leader of the Goff Nobz" in my storyline. I don't think of him as Ghaz really, just as a guy who makes my Goff army fluffy and very Goffy.
We have to call him Ghaz, but I really wish there was a term for his upgrade: "Goff warboss Upgrade (also can be called Ghazghkull Thraka)"
If they would have put that in the book it would be much more... um, palatable. Maybe if we depersonalize them, call it a Pedro Upgraded Captain or a Snick-Nob leading the Komandos. It might take a little while to change our perceptions about how individual the upgrades are, but at least it will better than traits in terms of balance, modelling, and gameplay.
I mention balance since a group could easily have an interpretation of the Special Characters rule that would prohibit three Ghazghkulls on a team of Ork Players playing against three Marine Players. Probably also best that there aren't three Marneus Calgars out there either, whether they be personalities or statistical bonuses in a list. The way to make this limitation palatable is to make them Special Characters, in a way that folks should be already accustomed to playing with: conservatively.
I think this was the intention.
Maybe.
____________________
"How is that even possible?!?"- Milkman
"Everybody can take all summer to build one flyer a piece.... Bam instant flying retard fest." - joe
"When you die, I'm gonna cry a little." - Derling
|
Major_Slovak
Super Moderator
| Joined: | Wed Aug 3rd, 2005 |
| Location: | Zombie |
| Posts: | 1091 |
| 40k Armies played: | non-Imperial imperial guard, weird orks |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Feb 11th, 2009 07:25 pm |
|
That's the problem, right? It caps the game out, hits the ceiling right away and just stays there.
Once you've got Marneus Calgar in your 1750 point list, what do you bring out for a really big game? More basilisks? A titan?
There should be characters in the 40k universe and storyline that are more scarce than a titan. Gives everybody something to look forward to, an epic sense to the story.
____________________
"These fragments I have shored against my ruin." Eliot
|
Brother Silas
D-Company Members
| Joined: | Thu Mar 31st, 2005 |
| Location: | Bluemound Highlands, USA |
| Posts: | 412 |
| 40k Armies played: | Back to the Blood Angels |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed Feb 11th, 2009 09:26 pm |
|
Pen dull wrote: Major_Slovak wrote:
I prefer having complete flexibility though, but if they're going to insist on formations (defined by characters) then why not just call Snikrot a Kommando Kaptain or something? I dislike the way they are going because they're pushing this sort of fake superhero universe, which goes directly against the "millions of inhabited planets" theme that is so cool about 40k.
Whenever I field Ghaz, I call him "The New Leader of the Goff Nobz" in my storyline. I don't think of him as Ghaz really, just as a guy who makes my Goff army fluffy and very Goffy.
We have to call him Ghaz, but I really wish there was a term for his upgrade: "Goff warboss Upgrade (also can be called Ghazghkull Thraka)"
If they would have put that in the book it would be much more... um, palatable. Maybe if we depersonalize them, call it a Pedro Upgraded Captain or a Snick-Nob leading the Komandos. It might take a little while to change our perceptions about how individual the upgrades are, but at least it will better than traits in terms of balance, modelling, and gameplay.
I mention balance since a group could easily have an interpretation of the Special Characters rule that would prohibit three Ghazghkulls on a team of Ork Players playing against three Marine Players. Probably also best that there aren't three Marneus Calgars out there either, whether they be personalities or statistical bonuses in a list. The way to make this limitation palatable is to make them Special Characters, in a way that folks should be already accustomed to playing with: conservatively.
I think this was the intention.
Maybe.
It does say in the Marine Codex, at least, that you should feel free to take special characters and rename them to fit how you want to have your army. So I did with Captain Sicarus. As it happened, Sicarus had everything the model I have carries, and his characteristics were appealing.
Renamed Captain Silas, my former Blood Angel Commander now reappears in large games. I couldn't even tell you what Chapter Captain Sicarus came from, it doesn't matter. That character stat sheet is now just my 200 pt Commander for big games.
BTW, didn't this thread start with Slovak messing himself over new guard stuff? Perhaps a new thread would be appropriate to keep this one going.
|
HDEagle71
Administrator
| Joined: | Wed Mar 30th, 2005 |
| Location: | Milwaukee, Wisconsin USA |
| Posts: | 1015 |
| 40k Armies played: | All of Chaos, Dark Eldar, Tau, Sisters, Orks |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Feb 16th, 2009 02:50 pm |
|
I think it is funny that people complain about not using special characters then when they allow it people complain that armies have special characters.
I am about 70 30 70% of the time I do not have a SC 30% I do it depends on the army.
World Eaters must have Kharne they must it is a rule for me he is my favorite mutha fucka!
Peace with a Chain Axe!
____________________
My Armies are Not Cheesey But they Still Stink
The Admins Suck :-)
|
Current time is 05:34 pm | Page:   1 2 |
|
|
|
|
