|
|
Post by KevinC on Apr 28, 2021 16:10:48 GMT
In my view, the 8th edition Beastmen book made Beastmen too similar to Orcs & Goblins. The best army list for Beastmen, and which made them a unique army, was the 6th edition Beasts of Chaos army book. I wrote an 8th edition errata for that book to allow its use in 8th edition. You can check it out here (you have to scroll down): Beasts of ChaosHey Kev, thanks for pointing that out, I’ve enjoyed reading it. I certainly agree that Beastmen had a more unique flavour in 6th Edition and updating these rules for 8th plus adding the 7th Edition units would be very much like what GW did for (funnily enough) Orcs and Goblins (their 8th Animosity rules were a repeat of their 6th Edition rules rather than carrying over the 7th Edition rules). Your addendum covers a lot of the main points, but I have a few points I’d like to add: - Personally I’d prefer to see the 7th Edition rules for Primal Fury over what is simply pretty much army-wide Hatred, mainly because Primal Fury allows for hatred in combat turns after the first, it has some variable outcomes to keep it balanced, and also because calling your rule ‘Children of Chaos’ becomes pretty pointless when it just gives most Beastmen units Hatred - it’d be better to simply state that the units have Hatred in their special rules section - whereas Primal Fury is a unique rule different from normal Hatred. Not to mention that one of the Storm of Magic Cataclysm spells for Beastmen revolves around Primal Fury. With regards to Malagor’s Icon of Vilification rule, it could be amended to allow all friendly units within 6” of him to automatically pass Primal Fury tests.
- With the three named Lord choices from the 6th book, Throgg and Kholek (who should appear in a Beastmen army as Dragon Ogres and Chaos Trolls are there, I have no problem with that) plus your rules for Malagor inspired by the 7th book, we have 6 named Lord choices. That's fine, but conversely just from your addendum we only have 2 named Hero choices (Ungrol and Ghorros), which leaves an imbalance between named Lords and Heroes - most armies have a roughly equal number of named Lords and Heroes. I’m surprised you didn’t include Taurox, Moonclaw and Slugtongue in your addendum, because these would be great to add as Hero choices. If you didn’t include them originally because you weren’t able to think of ways in which they could be made decent (especially in the case of Moonclaw) I’d be happy to work on improving these.
- Given that you're allowing the Ghorgon as presented in Storm of Magic to be used, wouldn't it make sense then for its version of the Bloodgreed rule to apply to Minotaurs, Doombulls, Gorebulls and Tzaanbulls (as it does for the former three in the 7th book)?
- Given that the Raiders special rule is back in full form, I’d recommend changing the name of your Ungor-exclusive Core unit to something like Ungor Hunters to avoid confusion with the name of this army special rule.
- It’s great that you’ve included rules for Tzaangor Skyfires, but there aren’t any rules for Tzaangor Enlightened, which can be built from the same kit. They’re armed with spears where the Skyfires are armed with bows.
- I like the idea of a Minotaur shaman, but is there any lore basis behind the idea of Tzeentch Minotaurs being able to cast magic? Unless it's just a new unit creation of yours designed to expand the Minotaurs, in which case that's understandable. I'm planning to write rules for a Beastman unit devised by the guy who inspired a lot of my Albion work, called the Thickskull. You can see the illustration here: www.deviantart.com/dewitteillustration/art/Beastmen-Thickskull-844492851
- Given the Cockatrice has been included in the AoS Beastmen book, perhaps Beastmen could include it as a special choice, given that it's currently only used in Storm of Magic and it's another of the myriad Chaos creatures that exist in the Warhammer world?
- It's a pity that some of the mechanics from the 7th Edition book that did make the Beastmen unique, like the Shard of the Herdstone and the Despoilers rule for Bestigors won't make it through if the 6th Edition book is used as the basis. Perhaps these could be added, in the case of the Despoilers special rule giving a slight points increase for Bestigors?
- I do like the Mixed Herd idea and it would be great to see it return, but my main problem is that in the 6th Edition book Ungors had 25mm bases like Gors, whereas now they have 20mm bases. Would this matter too much in 8th Edition, where the rulebook specifically states that characters on 25mm bases in 20mm units should be put next to the unit rather than in it? I know you could simply form the Ungors into their own ranks behind the Gors, but what would happen, for instance, if there was only a single Gor in the back ranks? Would the first rank of Ungors be able to move forward?
------ lordofskullpass, you raise all fine points. I was trying to merely update the Beasts of Chaos book rather than do a complete rewrite. Already the errata is long. I left Primal Fury out because I figured there was enough special rules already in the Beast book. In fact, wherever possible, I tried to leave the Beasts of Chaos book intact. I was actually thinking up updating the errata with no references to the Warriors of Chaos book - i.e. leave Chaos Trolls, Ogres, Shaggoth as written from the Beasts of Chaos book, maybe with only amending point values. |
|
Steve
New Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by Steve on Jun 27, 2021 7:22:22 GMT
My regular opponent uses beastmen and a couple years ago we decided to allow them to take marks. It helps them a lot!
|
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Mar 7, 2022 15:43:14 GMT
Hello there fellow EEFLers! I’ve been eyeing Beastmen of late as a sixth army for my collection to go alongside my three Order armies and two other Destruction ones. While I’m more of a thematic player who mainly wants to collect a force that looks cool and isn’t too worried about overall power level, I still have noticed how Beastmen have been poorly-treated by GW when it came to writing their rules, not only through GW ‘conveniently’ missing out on giving them an 8th Edition book, but also through omission of some of their units in the 7th Edition book that were instead given to one of GW’s teacher’s pets, the Warriors of Chaos. With this in mind, I’ve been planning to predominantly use the 7th Edition book, but also for 8th Edition use the following extras: - The updated rules for Ambush from Glottkin, because the 7th version was pointless
- Give my Beasts the ability to take Marks, also using the Glottkin points values
- Allow Beastmen to take Chaos Ogres, Chaos Trolls, Dragon Ogres and Shaggoths using their rules and points in the Warriors of Chaos book (but ignoring the Eye of the Gods rule for the Ogres as they didn’t have that mechanic in the Beastmen 6th book).
I explicitly don’t want to use the full extent of the Legions of Chaos list because that just combines all the special rules from all three main Chaos armies and uses the End Times army selection rules - I don’t want to have to roll on the Reign of Chaos table every turn because that’s a mechanic for Chaos Daemons, I don’t want to use the Eye of the Gods table because that’s a Warriors of Chaos rule and I don’t want to use the End Times army selection rules. Essentially what I’m trying to do is give back to Beastmen what was lost from the 6th Edition book (using the Legions of Chaos points and rules purely because they work better with 8th) while keeping it a specifically Beastmen-only list, to give them essentially their equivalent of an 8th release, just as Skaven got a few extras from Thanquol to give them their equivalent of an 8th release.
What do you think my fellow Beastlords? I do your first two - Points with the Glottkin additions allowed but keep it purely Beastmen so no WOC options. Likewise no Eye of the Gods as this is a WOC mechanic. Lore wise it makes sense to me as Dragon Ogres are more from the North and cold regions whereas Beastmen tend to come from the forest areas. Gamewise this also makes it easier to manage as you just need 2 books. The Armybook and the Glottkin book. Also prevents an issue with someone questioning your 'Beastmen' army by looking at a profile/rule in a different Armybook (WOC) Of course in pure fun Chillhammer games Dragon Ogres are allowed as Beastmen allies......but then so are fatties like Orange Cassidy the 'Slothrus' pictured....as well as a whole slew of other options amalgamated from my years of Games Mastering. So basically I recommend your first two - points but keep it to the Beastmen book when it comes to Unit options. If you want an 'alternate' rare choice that's (in many cases) a bit better than the rare Beastmen options and fun. I'd actually recommend trying to get them accept the Incarnate Elemental of Beasts from Storm of Magic..... It's in the name and not stepping on any other armies toes. Bonus...it's 275 points like the rest of the Beastmen options. I think this is less likely to ruffle feathers.  |
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Mar 8, 2022 5:24:54 GMT
Does it not make sense for beastmen to roll on the eye of the gods table? Particularly if they're marked? I remember reading an interview with I think Phil Kelly about this where he said that Beastmen already 'belong' to Chaos so don't attract the Eye of the Gods in the same way that other mortals do. |
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Mar 9, 2022 12:29:19 GMT
For this badboy....aka probably the single worst for the points item in the game....the signature weapon of the Beastmen... I was thinking that adding "No saves of any kind may be taken against the Primeval Club" makes it a much more useable and interesting item. At 100 points a Beastlord won't have any big defence and it's still only 1 wound per wounding hit so hardly overpowering.  |
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on Mar 10, 2022 0:56:47 GMT
For this badboy....aka probably the single worst for the points item in the game....the signature weapon of the Beastmen... I was thinking that adding "No saves of any kind may be taken against the Primeval Club" makes it a much more useable and interesting item. At 100 points a Beastlord won't have any big defence and it's still only 1 wound per wounding hit so hardly overpowering. I think no save of any kind is too powerful. That is better than a runefang. Heck even Ghal Maraz doesn't negate ward saves. Instead I would change it to "When rolling to wound and for calculating armor save modifier, the owners strength..." |
|
|
|
Post by markdienekes on Jul 27, 2022 22:02:30 GMT
I've just picked up a great model from Diehard miniatures, a giant harpy. We need hero harpies!  |
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Aug 3, 2022 18:07:58 GMT
For this badboy....aka probably the single worst for the points item in the game....the signature weapon of the Beastmen... I was thinking that adding "No saves of any kind may be taken against the Primeval Club" makes it a much more useable and interesting item. At 100 points a Beastlord won't have any big defence and it's still only 1 wound per wounding hit so hardly overpowering. I think no save of any kind is too powerful. That is better than a runefang. Heck even Ghal Maraz doesn't negate ward saves. Instead I would change it to "When rolling to wound and for calculating armor save modifier, the owners strength..." To be fair there are like 12 Runefangs and only one Primeval club 😀 Also isn't a Runefang less points and auto wounds? I'm away atm and don't have my empire book in front of me but it was 85 points iirc? A Beastlord only has 100 points of magical allowance so if they take the club it's 100% of their magical allowance including gifts so ensures they will have no real defence so basically a glass cannon. It's not multi wound unlike Ghal Maraz so limited in that regard and no where near as good. No saves of any kind I thought would be kind of unique and lore fitting for this thing. Against something like a troll it's going to need a 4+ to wound (as opposed to the usual 3+ on Strength 5) and unlike say a Grandmaster with a Runefang a Beastlord cannot fly (pegasus) or ride with a crew (horseback) so the only way to get it into combat quick is with a chariot which when combined with no proper defence makes it not really an optimal choice. Now I guess a Doombull could be really scary with one....but that's a frenzy, low save, leadershop 8 creature so still imo very vulnerable and not game breaking. So you are limited to a 5+ armor save at best with either option (heavy armor) unless going with a chariot mounted Beastlord (4+) if you take the Primeval club. A Grandmaster with a Runefang has a 1+ armor save and is quicker than any of the above options and far more consistent....and that's before you spend the available magic points to buff him. While a Runefang has non optimal opponents, my proposed 'no save allowed' buffed Primeval club actually has 'negative' opponents such as Night Goblins whereby the 100 point club would make zero difference to the offensive effect of a Beastlord or Doombull against them. So when I propose this I'm looking at the army as a whole considering the inherent limitations. Definitely on something like WOC or Vampire counts or even dwarfs with a higher than 100 point magic allowance or swifter/better defence it would be OP I feel that with Beastmen it would just make the Primeval club a fluffy, usable choice rather than an OP one. I did consider no armor saves and reroll successful ward saves as a possible alternative (ie, OTS effect) which means Regeneration still works in full but thought then with all the drawbacks it still would see no use. I appreciate your 2c. |
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on Aug 4, 2022 14:15:28 GMT
I think no save of any kind is too powerful. That is better than a runefang. Heck even Ghal Maraz doesn't negate ward saves. Instead I would change it to "When rolling to wound and for calculating armor save modifier, the owners strength..." To be fair there are like 12 Runefangs and only one Primeval club 😀 Also isn't a Runefang less points and auto wounds? I'm away atm and don't have my empire book in front of me but it was 85 points iirc? A Beastlord only has 100 points of magical allowance so if they take the club it's 100% of their magical allowance including gifts so ensures they will have no real defence so basically a glass cannon. ... You are correct a Runefang is 15 points cheaper. I still think ignoring ward saves is a bad idea. Literally nothing else in the game has that power. If anything lower the points for the Primeval Club. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2022 16:02:44 GMT
Lizardmen have the Blade of Realities that costs 100 points and doesn't allow armour or ward saves, which is about as close a comparison as I can think of. So having the Leadership swap and not allowing Regeneration saves might be a bit much.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on Aug 4, 2022 17:13:47 GMT
Lizardmen have the Blade of Realities that costs 100 points and doesn't allow armour or ward saves, which is about as close a comparison as I can think of. So having the Leadership swap and not allowing Regeneration saves might be a bit much. I stand corrected! I didn't know Lizardmen had a magic weapon that ignores ward saves. It is 100 points and only ignores armor and ward saves (no strength or wound enhancement). So the Primeval Club boosting strength and ignoring armor + ward saves, for the same price, seems too good. |
|
|
|
Post by grandmasterwang on Aug 5, 2022 9:02:29 GMT
Lizardmen have the Blade of Realities that costs 100 points and doesn't allow armour or ward saves, which is about as close a comparison as I can think of. So having the Leadership swap and not allowing Regeneration saves might be a bit much. I forgot about this weapon completely as I don't play Lizardmen and have never gone against it. When home I'll check out my lizardmen book. Thanks for bringing this one up. It is indeed a very close comparison. There are some other things in the game which ignore Ward saves. Ie test or die. To the Goat. The piranha blade sets a great precedent with its 100 points and effects so from this I would look to change my rules for the club a little bit to keep it in line with the Piranha blade but a bit different. I certainly don't want it to be objectively 'more powerful' than an equivalent 100 point item so this is quite convincing that my potential rules were a bit too much. I also want the Primeval Club to be unique so my potential rules were too similar to this existing item. |
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on Aug 5, 2022 21:57:33 GMT
There are some other things in the game which ignore Ward saves. Ie test or die. To the Goat. I thought the discussion was about magic weapons. When I said nothing has that power, I meant no magic weapons. But obviously there is at least one magic weapon that ignores ward saves. So I was wrong in my assertion. |
|
|
|
Post by markdienekes on Aug 6, 2022 8:27:46 GMT
Lizardmen have the Blade of Realities that costs 100 points and doesn't allow armour or ward saves, which is about as close a comparison as I can think of. So having the Leadership swap and not allowing Regeneration saves might be a bit much. Doesn't it kill the figure outright too, or has the chance to? Just checked, it if the model fails a ld test, it is slain outright. Quite powerful really. |
|
|
|
Post by thegoat on Aug 6, 2022 10:24:09 GMT
Lizardmen have the Blade of Realities that costs 100 points and doesn't allow armour or ward saves, which is about as close a comparison as I can think of. So having the Leadership swap and not allowing Regeneration saves might be a bit much. Doesn't it kill the figure outright too, or has the chance to? Just checked, it if the model fails a ld test, it is slain outright. Quite powerful really. Where are you seeing that? The Blade of Realities in my 8th ed Lizardman book says nothing about "if the model fails a ld test, it is slain outright." |
|
