Discussion on the recommended fixes

All questions or things you think are wrong about the new book to be posted here. Will collate into a long list and get it sent off after a while!

Moderators: Rangers, Leaders

Warrior
 
Posts: 733
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 am
Location: Winnipeg, Canada

Re: Discussion on the recommended fixes

Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:38 pm

Doh! I'm a morot... :lol:

Warrior
 
Posts: 666
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 2:57 pm
Location: Kirkby In Ashfield

Re: Discussion on the recommended fixes

Sat Feb 11, 2012 12:23 am

I feel Banner heroes should NOT be banners for Victory conditions. Its just not right. Imrahil is an inspiring presence but you dont want to capture him the same as you want to capture your enemy colours.

Gildor I feel should have UNARMOURED elves in his list. I think these should be differentiate to "only if you include Gildor" types.

I believe Gollum should also be allowed if Bilbo is around.

Kamul, well in the old rules he could only alter HIS OWN stats not the fellbeasts so I would say stick with that

Knight of umbar +transfix - I would have thought he steals his opponents 3 attacks as he steals base stats not modified stats.

The great beast issue. Well before you could dismount warg riders and both warg n rider had to die to count as ONE kill. So I don't see how this changes.

Ghost Knights - agreed make shield an option for 1pt

Standard Bearer
 
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Discussion on the recommended fixes

Sat Feb 11, 2012 12:38 am

Cheers for the feedback.

Standard Bearer
 
Posts: 1229
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 11:55 pm

Re: Discussion on the recommended fixes

Sat Feb 11, 2012 3:10 pm

Just in reply to the hero banners issue, my view on it comes down to the wording. Imrahil shouldnt count as a banner because its not in his rules to, but in the rules of the Swan Knights etc. Other models like the Golden King have 'counts as banner' in their own personal stat line.

I do think it is unfair on some personally, as I dont see why someone playing fiefdoms would want to spend points on another banner if they already have a very expensive 12" one. It really is wasting 25 points + the base cost of a model for no real added benefit.
But then if it isnt played as such, as Hixont had mentioned, what if models like Imrahil or Angbor are fielded without the troops regarding the special rule?

I do use banners alot, but they are expensive things and I personally wouldnt want to be caught paying for them twice just for one or two scenarios.

Nemo

User avatar
Istari
 
Posts: 1428
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 7:56 am

Re: Discussion on the recommended fixes

Sat Feb 11, 2012 3:27 pm

Would it be an idea to unlock those threads to keep an easy track of it all?

User avatar
Warrior
 
Posts: 551
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2009 4:26 pm
Location: Retford, North Notts

Re: Discussion on the recommended fixes

Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:05 am

nemo wrote:Just in reply to the hero banners issue, my view on it comes down to the wording. Imrahil shouldnt count as a banner because its not in his rules to, but in the rules of the Swan Knights etc. Other models like the Golden King have 'counts as banner' in their own personal stat line.

I do think it is unfair on some personally, as I dont see why someone playing fiefdoms would want to spend points on another banner if they already have a very expensive 12" one. It really is wasting 25 points + the base cost of a model for no real added benefit.
But then if it isnt played as such, as Hixont had mentioned, what if models like Imrahil or Angbor are fielded without the troops regarding the special rule?

I do use banners alot, but they are expensive things and I personally wouldnt want to be caught paying for them twice just for one or two scenarios.

Nemo


I kind of see where you're coming from, but if for example we say the gk does count as a banner for vp in to the death then he becomes a lot more attractive to field. He's far harder to kill than your average banner bearer, doesn't require such stringent protection and doesn't have his combat effectiveness neutralised.

On the other hand if you rule that he doesn't count I doubt anyone would field him, since your going to need at least one banner bearer for to the death it means that fielding the gk would also require you to fork out for a regular banner as well when you have already paid for it once anyway. IMHO banners are not an efficient use of points anyway, there aren't many situations where a banner has proved worth the 3-4 regular troops it replaces in my games.

Imrahil is a difficult case because he doesn't count as a banner, models with a certain special rule count him as a banner and that's not the same thing. I would say any hero that counts as having a banner (such as Boromir or Gamling with their flags, or the gk with his throne) should count for the vp condition in to the death.
Spiney Norman, Former Standard Bearer of the Last Alliance

For the time will soon come when Hobbits will shape the fortunes of all.

Villager
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: Discussion on the recommended fixes

Sun Feb 12, 2012 1:14 am

I'm quite up in arms about your recommendation that the KotWT's special rule should also work when he fights one-handed. This just doesn't make sense: the White Sword is specifically stated to be two-handed, there's no elven-blade-like either/or option - if it's used, it has to be used with two hands. I do not see why he should get the 2-wound-benefit when fighting with his (supposed) additional one-handed weapon instead of with the sword that grants the rule. ;)

Oh, and I'm with Spiney Norman on his assessment of count-as banners in regard to VPs. :)

Warrior
 
Posts: 733
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 am
Location: Winnipeg, Canada

Re: Discussion on the recommended fixes

Sun Feb 12, 2012 4:18 am

Zogash wrote:I do not see why he should get the 2-wound-benefit when fighting with his (supposed) additional one-handed weapon instead of with the sword that grants the rule. ;)


Have to agree with that!

User avatar
Istari
 
Posts: 1428
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 7:56 am

Re: Discussion on the recommended fixes

Sun Feb 12, 2012 10:08 am

whafrog wrote:
Zogash wrote:I do not see why he should get the 2-wound-benefit when fighting with his (supposed) additional one-handed weapon instead of with the sword that grants the rule. ;)


Have to agree with that!


Agreed too, if your not using the two handed weapon then you are using something else.

Villager
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:43 pm

Re: Discussion on the recommended fixes

Thu Feb 16, 2012 4:30 pm

A few things I saw in the Free Peoples Book and would like addressing by GW:

1) Allow Wood Elves to be added to the Eregion/Rivendell army section OR errata Gildor so that he can purchase his own Warband of upgraded Wood Elves. This had to be an over sight and I think the latter idea works thematically.

2) Give Glorfindel back his terror. His points and stats didn't change and he's one of the few mortals that can scare the Witch King.

3) Allow Glorfindel/Arwens horse the Fleet Foot rule. Glorfindel counbts as flying in War of the Ring and its an elven steed so I was disappointed it wasn't changed over even for a points increase.

4) The Storm Caller wears armor but only has a defense of 4 meaning he's a hero with defense 3. Either increase the defense to 5 or remove the armor. This occurs in a lot of places. Guards of the Galadrhim Court wear heavy armor but their leader Rumil only wears light. Celeborn is unarmed without buying his Elven Blade but if you buy his shield you still have to buy the blade therefore wasting 5 points. A lot of the dwarf hero defences are inconsistant too with some dwarves wearing the same armor but getting differant defences. Major issue? Probably not but it could have been more consistant.

PreviousNext
Return to FAQ for the 2012 SBG Books

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest