Just a quick heads up that the previous "Support" button has been changed to a clearer "Donate" button, with a link that now is in English (did not realise that it had apparently had been in Swedish for everyone it seems!). This also include a "monthly recurring" option since a few of you had asked if I had a Patreon account or similar, which was not the case back then.
So, if any of you felt like donating in the past and could not get past the Swedish donation page (in which case I don't blame you) it should now be easier to do so. Any donations to help me and the project keep going are much appreciated.
Welcome to the Warhammer Armies Project, the home of the unofficial 9th Edition for Warhammer Fantasy Battles and the most popular unofficial army lists online. It will gradually be updated with new books in a rules-only format. It also serves as my hobby blog for my personal Warhammer collection.
I just checked the 1d4chan page on your Bretonnia edition. It says that the "Crusader Templars" are a situational unit for fluff armies and are overall 'meh'. That "Herrimaults" are only good to be nuisances. The "Faceless" are worse than the Crusader Templars.
ReplyDeleteI suggest giving the Templars some more special rules that allow them to buff nearby units. It would fit their whole "Scholarly Warrior" shtick you gave them.
Herrimaults should have better stats than the bow men and some sort of abilities that makes them good at attacking from stealth.
The faceless need the most improvemets.
They say that the Truffle Hounds are a good concept and can be great but are a bit let down by them not being their own unit.
Yeah, I have read that before, and I do agree that they are more of a fluffy choice more than anything (though the same can be said for many of the character choices introduced in 8th ed like Sea Helms and Fleetmasters). I will see about making some improvements to them though.
Delete