Druchii.net

Some updates made to the Alpha...

OMFGTHANKS to Loflar for his brilliant idea.

Maybe chance the Ferocious Charge rule to the following:

Takedown: Slavehounds are trained to catch fleeing slaves and drag them to a halt as fast as possible. On a turn a slavehound charges a roll of "6" to hit results in the model attacked automatically being knocked down immediately. The dog forgoes a more damaging attack to bring the "escapee" under control and no "to wound" roll is made.

It's already in there, Arq. >.> (Ansob.)

Well The Dogs are in? Nice!
My Idea of adjusting the BM capturing skill:

When an animal is taken o.o.a. by the beastmaster he can try to capture it. Roll on the BM's Ld with a penalty of the animals Ld (with all boni from other beasthandlers (and leaders to them) as usual). If the Darkelve succeeds, the animal is from now on part of the warband. Note that the animal is o.o.a. and has to roll for seriour injuries.

This makes it quite difficult to captuer someone, but makes enough fun, even to the other warbant, because they have to keep as much as possible Ld around their dogs.

Suggestions?

The capture rule is out. It was only going to be in if the hounds couldn't stay. Otherwise, the BM wouldn't be priced at 45 gc, but more like 60.

Are you editing A4 list with the changes that we agree on or do we have to read everything that is said to. it would be nice to have it all on one place

With the hounds as written I'm happy to leave them in. I think there may be a slight problem though:

(for this reason, you may want to roll Slavehound attacks first).

This suggest we can have the slave-hounds break the normal initiative rules.

TeGe wrote:Are you editing A4 list with the changes that we agree on or do we have to read everything that is said to. it would be nice to have it all on one place

It's being edited as we go. That's why there's a changelog.

Arquinsiel wrote:This suggest we can have the slave-hounds break the normal initiative rules.

Hrm; I'll remove it, then. It was just so people didn't whine about the rules being unclear.

ANSOB wrote:The capture rule is out. It was only going to be in if the hounds couldn't stay. Otherwise, the BM wouldn't be priced at 45 gc, but more like 60.

Now, I like this rule! Make the BM more expensive! We cannot put the full hero ammount in a starting warband, anyway. People will be forced to choose, why not?

Arquinsiel wrote:This suggest we can have the slave-hounds break the normal initiative rules.

What do you mean by this? I don't see problems.

Quote tags take quote marks. (Ansob.)

The way it read before I changed it was "you may roll Slavehound attacks before anyone else's," more or less. The rule was edited to clarify, so nothing changed.

It might be an idea to let you roll to wound anyway to see if a critical hit is made. It could represent tthe model banging his head off the kerb as the dog knocks him or something.

Wouldn't it become too complex?

It would, yeah. I think we'll just leave it at what it is for now.

Two things.

First off, I've been reading, rereading and rerereading the old Lustria list, as well as the other elven list (Shadows Warriors) and I've made a few changes to bring the two lists closer together. Nothing except prices have changed, so don't worry.

Secondly, the amount of racial special rules we have is starting to get a tad complicated. Since Long-Lived is probably the most akwardly-worded one as well as the longest, what would people say to either shortening it (I don't know how) or seeing it entirely go?

I think "Long lived" should definitely stay. I think we're starting to escalate power in our list, and I'm getting frightened that it won't be accepted as official by the "powers that be" because people will consider it broken (a la Chaos in WHF). I think "long lived" is a nice way to prevent our warband from being considered "over-powering" at an early stage in mid-campaign.

As for the Noble, 75 GC???? Is the 5GC increase a cost increase DUE TO "Feared and respected"? Unless that rule is in there as a "Negative skill", and is therefore CHEAPENING the noble, I really think we should remove it and go back to 70 GC. I just feel our Noble is getting too expensive... Irregardless, cheers for reworking the list (AND adding back in MoP!!! YAY!!!). I think it's really starting to look much better than our old list.

There were some complaints (from Loflar's gaming group, amongst others) that F&R made DE stubborn, and thus too powerful, since you can still voluntarily rout. I nerfed the rule (66% instead of 50%) and raised our Noble's price.

Note that I'm fiddling with prices again right now: the Lordlings should be 45 and the Beastmaster 40, given stats and abilities. I agree that we're starting to look a tad overpowering, but that needs PT.

I just noticed the changes in A4 ;-)

ANSOB wrote:May Hire

A Dark Elf warband may employ the following Hired Swords: Pit Fighter, Ogre Bodyguard, Warlock, Imperial Assassin, Tilean Marksman and Dark Elf Assassin.

Why not the fallen sister? Just curious.

Nice work, guys! It seems our list will round up soon. (just wanted to say that)

To the BM I would like to see him having Ini 6! Because he has to manage with all tese beasts, whatever. Also this might increase his price to the magic 45gc. So no hero is cheaper than the hencemen. In comparison to the lordlings he opens the dogs and can get the whips, so his lower bs doesn't weigh too much.

Loflar wrote:Why not the fallen sister? Just curious.

Cenyu very adequately pointed out to me in the chat that the Fallen Sister can't be hired by "evil" warbands. Although the "all elves" argument does apply, she'd be bound to realise we're not that nice after a while, and unless we introduced a new rule that said that we can only hire "good" HS for one game at a time because they confuse us and then realise there's something fishy, that's a no-go.

The BM is meant to be a CC character, so the BS is fine as it is. It also prevents the warband from being too powerful at startup (you'll notice I applied the rule that was applied to the shado warriors - discounts on what Naggaroth makes). That said, the BM is kind of supposed to be our "Youngblood" equivalent (in a very, very, very distant way ), so him being cheaper and having less initiative works. One other thing is, what with Lordlings and the Sorceress being 45 gc, it just doesn't seem right to have all of our heroes bar Leader be that price. In addition, the Slavehounds are I4, which is slow enough that the I5 BM can still whip them senseless.

The list is indeed making some progress, really. I think our items and price for them is settled; our henchmen price is dealt with, though corsairs might be decreased 5 gc (did you noticed I added rope and hook for cool boarding actions?). The only thing I have an issue with is that these prices are good in relation to each other, not to the rest of the game (not quite). I think the next version can be a Beta (zomg!), and then it's PT, more PT, more more PT and an extra dose of PT.

A neutral shade of black. wrote: and then it's PT, more PT, more more PT and an extra dose of PT.

Party time? ;-)

Maibd poison ... This effect lasts until the Dark Elf player's next turn.

is it ment like that, or do we mean 'in the victims next recovery phase'?

I noticed the hooks for the starting warband - every modern corsair has to have one .

It's meant to be that. It's IMO simpler to understand the intent that way.

And arr, corsairs with hooks!
(These forums need a pirate smiley.)

Loflar: not really.

BTW, i was modlign the "check for critical" bit on the rules for black lotus. Even though they automatically wound you can still roll to see if a hit is a critical one.

Geophrim wrote: As for the Noble, 75 GC????

The Orc warband leader is even more expensive, at 80gc. And even though he only I3, he's got that tasty S4 and T4. Yay for MoP though.

And a pirate smiley wouldn't quite do..a corsair/corsair-with-a-pirate-hat would be even better.

I know this skill has been discussed extensively, but I have another idea to suggest. What if the skill requires a 30gc investment to use each time, and the hero will make d3 does of dark venom. This would mean we would break even when the hero would make two doses (this does not include the rare cost of course). This would also include the idea that the process of making a poison is not always simple or fully successful, and sometimes things would go better than expected.

I've play tested the current skill (d2 doses for free) with a friend of mine, and he was rather annoyed that the skill basically was worth on average 23gc per game it seemed overpowered to him even though I was not allowed to sell the poisons for cash. By the end of our 10 game campaign, I had three heroes with this skill (I love dark venom), which meant I was essentially earning on average an additional 68gc every game. At this point he asked me if I would play a different warband...

Well, the one problem is that spending gold and an advance roll is too much, really. I've been contemplating taking that skill back to the old Lustria version (d3-1), but it's too annoying. IMO the d2 version is pretty good. It's your choice to make that much DV, of course. Most people I know would be getting Fey Quickness and Dodge/Step Aside first.

Anyway, munetary extraness is really out of the question (unless you can point me to a skill that sets precedent - we're trying to stay within the general brackets of established Mordheim rules). There's a good chance the skill might change if you're not the only one whose opponent complains, though. Any chance you'll keep playtesting for us, too?