Wednesday, 7 March 2018

Warhammer: High Elves 9th Ed out now!

Clocking in at 222 pages, this is the second longest book I have finished. It contains pretty much every official source on High Elves ever written, combining both the reign of the Phoenix Kings as well as the full stories of Tyrion, Teclis, Eltharion, Imrik and Alith Anar, along with the Island of Blood and dozens of short stories. I've also extended all the background for the various units, giving them about 2 pages each compared to the half to one page they got in 8th ed, so there's a lot of new stuff to read if you haven't read all the previous books. In short (as usual), this would be your ultimate High Elves tome for Warhammer.

Download


  • New Lord: Lord of Aenarion (from Warhammer Quest).
  • New Hero: Mistweaver (from Warhammer Quest/Storm of Chaos) 
  • New Special Character: Sea Lord Aislinn.
  • New Special Character: Selafyn.
  • New Special Character: Imrik.
  • New Special Character: Belannaer the Wise.
  • Tyrion has Curse of Aenarion special rule. 
  • Teclis has Curse of Aenarion special rule. Buffed Moon Staff.
  • Eltharion is mounted on Stormwing by default, have spear instead of long bow.
  • Lileath's Blessing now gives +1 to dispel instead.
  • Arch Mages and Nobles may not ride dragons.
  • Mages may not ride chariots. 
  • Nobles may not ride Griffons.
  • Anointed of Asuryan cannot be army's general, gives Immunity (Psychology) and allows re-roll of ward save results of 1 to make him useful in Phoenix Guard units. No longer has Magic Resistance.
  • Added Pegasus as a mount (as they had in 4th Ed).
  • Increased cost of Great Eagles for character mounts as they give them +1T.
  • Lothern Sea Helms have medium armour.
  • Skycutter 80 pts for Lothern Sea Helm as they cannot use Naval Disciple when mounted.
  • Dragon Mages may take light armour, not dragon armour.
  • Archers 12 pts/model, may take medium armour.
  • Spearmen may take a Magic Banner instead of Sea Guard.
  • Warriors may skirmish. 
  • Ellyrian Reavers renamed to Reaver Knights (as per 4th ed), cost 14 pts, can choose between spear or bows (or both) from the start.
  • Swordmasters 15 pts, have swordmaster rule to ignore Init penalties from great weapons as well as the deflect shots rule from 8th ed.
  • White Lions 15 pts, have Woodsman's axe which is a great weapon with special combat abilties (from 5th ed).
  • Lion Chariot 110 pts.
  • Dragon Princes 28 pts.
  • Shadow Warriors 15 pts.
  • Sisters of Avelorn 17 pts.
  • Phoenix Guard are not immune to psychology.
  • Handmaidens of the Everqueen 21 pts. 
  • Standard of Avelorn gives +2 to cast, not +4, cost 10 pts.
  • Frostheart Phoenix 260 pts, have S5 instead of S6. 
  • Clarified that Flame Kindled and Wake of Fire are non-physical attacks. Wake of Fire inflicts D6 hits for each unit it passes over, but not not cause hits for additional ranks.
  • The Phoenixes have Immunity (Flaming/Ice Attacks) respectively.
  • Shadow Armour returned to magic items.
  • Banner of the World Dragon gives the unit Magic Resistance (5).
  • Arcane unforging can only be cast on characters.

72 comments:

  1. -Consider making Lothern Sea Helms be WS/BS 5 and I6 to mark them more as leaders instead of combatants like Princes. It also lessens the gap between them and their subordinate Sea Guard rather than the sudden jump they get.
    -Why aren't Bows of Avelorn Armor Piercing like other Elven bows?
    -Either Anointed of Asuryan should be Ld 10 or Phoenix Guard Leadership 8. Or maybe they should be Unbreakable, unless it is that they forsee that they break and flee from a combat.
    -Alarielle's rules still talk about generating spells as if they are randomly generated.
    -The Moonbow used by Alith Anar ignores armor rather than having armor piercing as you've done to every bolt thrower.
    -Since you've made it that Monsters and riders share a profile, the Dragon Kin rule that Imrik has should be removed. Either that or make it possible to use him on foot, in which Dragon Kin does apply unless he attacks the dragon.
    -Imrik's Star Lance grants a +1 Strength bonus when charging instead of +2, making it weaker against unarmored target, unless it grants a +3 strength bonus when charging, you should clarify.
    -Belannaer the Wise's paragraph on magic says 'He do not generate', he also still has Always Strikes First and Deflect Shots rather than the Swordmaster rule.
    -Aislinn's Bow of the Seafarer has the same issue as the Moonbow. His mask of the Merlord should grant him Water Strider instead of River Strider.
    -Perhaps change the fluff of Soul Quench to a burst of Darkness, I see every lore represented in High Magic except for Death despite it being every wind woven together.
    -Why is the Lord of Aenarion unable to take Magic Items?
    -What happened to Archmages being able to ride Dragons and Griffons?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well Bow of Avelorn is already S4 so it penetrates armour as well as other bows and it's easier to wound with it.

      Delete
    2. - Will fix.
      - Because they are already S4.
      - There are plenty of cases where Heroes have the same Ld as an elite unit. HE already have White Lions to fulfill the stubborn/unbreakable role.
      - Will fix.
      - Will fix.
      - Will fix.
      - Will fix.
      - Will fix.
      - Will fix.
      - I don't want to change official fluff unless it's necessary, which I don't think is the case here.
      - Will fix.
      - This is going back to 6th/7th ed. Mages can already take dragons due to Dragon Mages, and none of the other options really is really fit a non-combat character. Dark Elves will still be able to have Dragons for their High Sorceress though due to having a designated model for it.

      Delete
    3. 5th edition disagrees with you on that last point.

      Delete
    4. You are right, I was thinking purely of 6th, my mistake. In 7th ed they got an arch mage option for Dragon kit as well. I will be adding back that option so it will be playable for the people with that build.

      Delete
    5. You appear to have based the merwyrm on the Storm of Magic rules but more modern ones appeared in Forge World, though with some weirdness that I assume is due to sloppiness on the writers part. Perhaps the statline of the Merwyrm could be changed to WS5, BS0, S5, T5, W5, I4, A4, Ld7 and it gains Poisoned Attacks and Enfeebling Cold (Units attempting to charge the Merwyrm subtract -2" from their charge distance and units in base contact subtract -1 from their strength. Units with Immunity (Ice Attacks) are unaffected by this rule.)

      Delete
    6. 5th Edition had a High Elf Dragon mage model? I don't remember that.

      Delete
    7. Yeah, but the Forge World rules are for different types of Merwyrm that inhabitat different parts of the ocean. Forge World stat lines are also all over the place, which is why I chose to keep it closer to the Storm of Chaos rules.

      Delete
    8. I don't think they had, but it was most likely possible to give the mages dragon mounts back then. 5th ed was pretty liberal with that sort of thing.

      Delete
  2. Cool. Even worth the 99.5 :D

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good work! As always!

    I have one doubt or maybe its a mistake: the repeater bolthrower special rule has been deleted from the elven bolt thrower?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, that's a bug, will fix ASAP.

      Delete
    2. I have realised about two more bugs:
      - The fast calvary rule of tiranoc chariots is not writeen in the army list profile.
      - The phoenix reborn special rule mention rules of the rider and the mount when in 9th they have split profile.

      Plus, I have the next doubt:
      "In 9th rulebook, when a character mount a monster (page 68) it says the rider can not combine the armour, ward saves and regeneration with the monster (It is right?: If not, why a dragon mage can wear light armour? Its useless).

      Delete
    3. - Yeah, that's a leftover, they are not really supposed to have Fast Cavalry (not even the light chariots of TK and Albion have that rule). It also goes against their armour save of 4+, as fast cavalry is limited at 5+.
      - Will fix that.
      - You are right about the dragon mage, I will give them light as standard for free, then you can also give them magical light armour if you want.

      Delete
  4. Hi,

    -Why no Unicorn mount for mages? http://www.solegends.com/marauder/mm83elfmageunicorn.htm

    - Would be possible to add Hallar of Caledor? He was the Swordmasters High Command, appears in page 103 talking near Tyrion. The character was created by Toumas Pirinnen for 5th edition.

    http://www.oocities.org/timessquare/realm/8940/hallar.html

    -Would be possible to add the options of Halberds for the Spearmen levy as an option?

    -Why there are Dragon Knights units as in the War of the Beard supplement? Orcs an Bretonnia get a news units of bestial cavalry with the AoS mega boars and the hyppo griffon knights.

    https://www.scribd.com/document/218577299/Warhammer-War-of-the-Beard-1

    -In 5th edition the Shadow Warriors had the option to get a shield.

    Thanks 4 the job!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. - I was not aware they had an official Unicorn model. I will add it in.

      - Not sure about Hallar being part of the main book since he was never published in any official document from what I know. I might do a small expansion for previous Phoenix Kings and heroes later on though, as I have a lot of different rules for them lying around.

      - I think keeping halberds for the Phoenix Guards is enough, makes them stand out more. High Elves have never used halberds for their core units from what I've seen.

      - The Dragon Princes from the War of the Beard are from a time when Dragons were still common, the background for the Dragon Princes explain why they ride horses now instead. Including Dragon Riders for anything but the War of the Beard (and earlier) would break that background.

      - The 4th ed Shadow Warriors really do not look anything like their modern counterpart though. However, the models could still be used as Warriors instead.

      Delete
    2. Pirinnen told he wasn't able to add it to the main book he did(the mark2) because of time/space.

      Delete
    3. Even in the War of Vengeance, Dragon riders weren't very common. Less than a dozen are listed in the series.

      Delete
    4. +1 For the Unicorn mage. It's a nice model.

      Delete
    5. This is a little out there, but what about a 4 horse 4 crew chariot. My elven attack chariots would love it.

      Delete
    6. Also, the mordheim SW have shields too. Not at all something that matters. But since you do a great job of accommodating old models and the subject came up...

      Delete
    7. Of course by the mordheim model logic they should also get a musician (ok I guess) and a standard (kind of dumb)

      Delete
    8. Correct me in a I'm wrong, but I believe the 4-horse chariot belonged to Wood Elves?


      True, I forgot about the Mordheim models also having shields, and full command. I guess I can add it in, the 4th ed Shadow Warriors also had bows and quivers as part of their model, which would make them ill fit to be used as warriors who lack that option.

      Delete
    9. pretty much all the models were Wood Elf and High Elf, and it was up to the painter to distinguish. But the 4 horse chariot is for sure in the 3rd edition list. The high elves even had (sea elf) wardancers.

      On the mordhim shadow warriors, those are some pretty forgettable models.

      Delete
    10. In 4th edition the sea guard can take halberds, one of the models that usually gets called a Phoenix guard even has a fish helmet. There is no need to make any changes to accommodate that one rank and file model though. Just a pointless bit of trivia.

      Delete
  5. Hi,

    First love the book!
    Some discrepancy with the Ld values of the Tiranoc Chariots however...
    Ld9 in Bestiary... Ld8 in Army Roster

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry for bothering you. There is something very important missing. The 8th ed ravening hordes for empire and high elves ;). Handmaidens of tje everqueen lost their quick to fire? They should have it for 21pts light infantry. Awesome work. I love it!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No worries, I will have those out as soon as I can. People have mostly been requesting the full books to be finished, so that's why that ahve been pushed back a bit :)

      Delete
    2. Oh, and I will also fix the Quick to Fire bug, they should still have it.

      Delete
  7. Hi,

    Just making sure the high magic trait doesn’t allow for wards to go above 4+ as stated in the rules?

    Also would sword masters benefit from a +6 parry in combat as well, I only add it in light of the fact if they are quick enough to deflect an arrow, crossbow bolt and bullets they should in theory be able to in combat, I know not a previous rule just appears apt they have it.

    Other than that absolutely loving the new book, great work!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, the ward save is capped at 4+ now.

      I have considered that, I think on it.

      Glad you like it!

      Delete
    2. Well as one of my favourite films says “if you can dodge a wrench you can dodge a ball” and so of course if you can Parry a bolt you can parry a blade ;-)

      Delete
  8. What's the lore attribute of the Mistweaver? The shield of saphery?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Mistweaver do not have a lore attribute as they only use those 3 spells, similar to Lord Kroak who only knows one spell.

      Delete
  9. Super hype for that Dark Elf book!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Should not take too long to finish it, I'll hopefully have it out next month :)

      Delete
  10. Consider to remove the arachnid (they Really dont fit to the fluff and Style of DE) and all monstrous cavalry from elves. Would make them even more Unique. Lore of metal an geaven for DE!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am considering that, yes. What Monstrous cavalry do any of the Elves have though?

      Delete
    2. Well we could have Caledor Drake riders and Chracian White lion riders, units of Eagle riders, Elves riding elemental beings.... maybe I am getting carried away with that last one...

      Delete
    3. That would be one of my wet dreams. Almost all armies have a unit of monstrous cavalry from 8th edition or Age of Sigmar. I can't see why I couldn't be posible to add some(I bought the Lion Cavalry from Shield Wolf to do some conversions).

      http://www.shieldwolfminiatures.com/index.php?dispatch=products.view&product_id=73

      Delete
    4. While I am not planning on including any of those units in the main book, I don't have an issue making them available in an expansion later :)

      Delete
  11. Why not to include Finubar? He is the actual Phoenix King and Its model is easy to represent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He never had any official rules or model, which is what I have chosen to include in these books. However, I have some unofficial rules available for him that I will publish later :)

      Delete
    2. That´s awesome! Are you working on a kind of characteres expansion?

      Delete
    3. Kind of, I at least have plans for it :)

      Delete
  12. Shouldn't the Spearmen and the Archers be able to choose between None, Light and Medium armour?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, the archers can already choose between those options. The Spearmen have always been pretty well armoured which is why they have medium armour by default. The archers on the other come with none (current plastics), light (4th ed plastics) and medium (5th ed metals).

      Delete
  13. Why there is no Handmaiden of the Everqueen Hero?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They have been changed into the Handmaiden unit instead. The Hero really did not add anything except the Quick to Fire rule to their unit, which the Handmaiden unit have by default.

      Delete
    2. Isn't the Handmaiden unit just a more elite version of the Sisters though? The fluff also mentions that they only number 100, which is probably too few to make a unit as opposed to a character.

      Delete
    3. Yes, they are, but there was a whole unit made for them with full command. Even if they only number around 100, that's still enough to field as a bodyguard in both the game and in the fluff.

      Delete
  14. Hello Mathias

    Been waiting for this book, even though I don't play high elves. Great work as always.

    Done my first read-through of the rules and some of the fluff, and here re some thoughts, few mistakes found and so on. The usual deal pretty much in that sense.

    -Loremaster missing the Swordmaster special rule in the army list section.

    -Ithilmar barding could perhaps have a special rule that told you it did not recice movement instead of having it a bit more vaguely described in the fluff section on the special rule. People might miss it or consider it just fluff otherwise.

    -The Curse of Aenarion need to be clarified a bit more I think. "As soon as a Lord of Aenarion is reduced to 1 wound, he gets a 2+ ward save for the rest of the battle" is a bt unclear: 1. The rules state you can only have one ward save on a character. 2. How does it work if for example Archaon chares and attacks with 10 attacks in practice for example? 10 dice are rolled to hit. lets say 8 wound. no arour saves. Let's assume the character already has a normal 5+ ward save and saves 3, which kills him and overkills him with two extra wounds. He is the rediced to beyone 1 wound in a single phase, does he still get the saves and on top of the regular saves as well? Or does it only start to apply if the Elf survives with one wound left at the end of that phase and also replace his regular ward save?
    On a personal note, I did play the game back when tyrion and teclis had this rule the first time around, and I honestly found it to be too powerful a special rule by far. Tyrion coould only be killed if his regiment broke and ran in practical terms. It didn't make for very good games. That said, I like the fluff of the rule and I think it is a cool idea that whole destiny thing is there, but I'd seriously consider reblancing it and making the rule into something else entirely... Nothing in the game can realistically hope to face Tyrion with that rule and the Hart of Averlorn, especialy not if interpreted in the most favourable terms for the high elf player... It was never a good rule as it was too begin with tbh and it is aldo complicated in practical terms.

    -The White lions "Lion Claw" special rule seems a bit much tbh and hard to really justify. It's such a good rule that that option alone should really increase the cost of the unit I think. I like the fluff of it, but I'd consider nerfing it to re-roll any 1's to wound or something peraps just a re-roll failed roll to wound. It's just a bit too "super hero" on top of everything else.

    -Shadow Armour is supposed to be a Heavy armour and not Medium? With the rebalancing of the armour it ust seems more fitting with medium to go with the fluff.

    -Banner of the World Dragon: If I'm not wrong, doesnt the rulebook state that Magical Resistance is capped at 3? I'm fine with it being 5, but it should perhaps state that it's an exception to the normal rule in the rulebook to avoid confusion.

    -Shouldn't Bellanear have the Swordmaster special rule as well?

    -I quite like the Lord of Aenarion Lord option, even though I don't like the curse rule as it tands. I find it a bit hard to justify them not having access to some magical items though, perhaps 50 points max and only weapons? They are Elven Lords of the highest caliber after all...

    -I haven't really looked too closely at any of the wizard character's rules as such (although I like the inclusion of the Mistwalkers and so on) because I think the rules for magic need to be fine-tuned a bit before any Wizards are really cost-effective generally speaking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. - Fixed.
      - It is mentioned in the special rule, or rather, not mentioned. Normal barding from the BRB states it gives -1 Movement, which ithilmar barding does not.
      - Have clarified it better, nerfed to a 3+. You are right that at 2+, it's too easy to shrug off.
      - Nerfed it to Heroic Killing Blow in the first round of close combat, does not apply to monsters. I agree it was probably too good otherwise.
      - Fixed.
      - Magic Resistance has an exception to that rule as standard.
      - Added magic items as an option, that was a bug.

      Delete
    2. Ahh. My mistake on the barding. Offcourse the standard barding has the special rule as a default.

      Heroic Killing Blow for the first round and not against monsters sounds much better yes. Sounds far more balanced. :-)

      Delete
  15. So, on to the ONLY thing I truly disliked about the book Mathias; the addition of the Warriors in the Core section... Here are my reasons for finding that including this option does more harm than good:

    1. It sort of undermines the fluff and sort of professional levy system that Ulthian is famous for. Spears aren't more expensive than swords and if you can collect a group of young elves together to fight as a unit, it is hard to justify why they weren't handed a sper (or bow more likely if they were untrained) to begin with...

    2. Spears and bows are the signarture hallmark of the High Elf Core, both amongst their greatest strenght, but also arguably one of their few weaknesses. By adding swordsmen as an option, this is undermined again, and doesn't really set them apart from the Dark Elves any longer.

    3. They are supposed to be sort of the least of the High Elves, yet they make a mockery of the Darr Elf Swordmen, with:
    -re-roll 1's to hit being better than re-roll 1's to wound (far more dice involved)
    -option to use two hand weapons
    -option to skirmish
    -valor special rule
    -with Elven Archer's now being far better in compariosn than the Dark Elf Cossbwmen (Multipleshot (2), Volley shot, 30" range and Armour Piercing), the Dark Elf core doesn't even have that edge any longer, so these warriors just rub extra salt into the wound as well. Comparitively speaking I mean...

    3. I know you make an effort to include rules for most things that has an old model, but but this is not always a good idea in my opinion, and it becomes hard to really justify it just because someone, somewhere has some old, outdated models he wants to field... Such things are better houseruled amongst friends than to be part of an "official" type army book that needs to have some semblance of balance to it when it comes to individual army strengths and weaknesses. Weaknesses define armies as much as strengths, if not more so, and I'm personally not a fan of filling in every "gap" in an army's weakness just because some fitting model exist somewhere that can do so. Diverse armies makes a game far better.

    So that's my rant of sorts. I hope you see that it comes from a well, meaning place Mathias and that I still think the rest of the book is very well done indeed. Very impressive work. :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1. The Warriors are meant to represent less organised troops, like Cothique Mariners and such, where spears are harder to use.

      2. Well, Dark Elves just got their Bleakswords added in their last addition, before that HE and DE had pretty much the same troop types in core.

      3. Statswise they are same, and they can act as the HE version of Corsairs with skirmish and two hand weapons. So DE have core troops with equal abilities and weapons. As for the long bows being better, that's necessarily the case, +6" and AP are good for sure, but they cannot move and shoot like Darkshards can. I am considering adding back AP to the repeater crossbows though.

      4. I hear you, and I do skip the inclusion of some really old models. However, pretty much everything from 4th ed and up I would like to see available in the books. Is there are anything in particular that you do not think should be included that has been suggested so far?

      Delete
    2. 1. I have no problem with what they re supposed to represent Mathias, but you can make the same kind of argument for just about every army list when you think about it. A similar "fighting man, yet not part of the proper army" kind of argument can be made for every sentient race really. It doesn't mean that it is a good fit for the army book of that race regardless.

      2. Yes. And Bleakswords were something that differentiated the core sections of the HE and DE armies. They on't have to be the same with the HE's always being superior. The HE has superior spearmen (by far), superior missile troops (now), better swordsmen (by far) and that doesn't even take into account the Seagauard and Silverhelms (heavy cavalry as a core option). In just about every army book, GW has made the High Elf core superior in comparison ,even though one would think that the decendants of ancient Nagarythe, the premier warlike society of the Elves of old would have had something going for them, comparitively speaking, but no... Get some young High Elves, train them a few years with spears, and they are somehow far superior than the Dark Elves that ar eprofessional soldiers and ruthless warriors their entire lives... It can't really be justified fuff-wise and I've always suspected that someone at GW has had a hard-on for HE's for decades...

      3. Stats are the same yes (as just about the stats of all core elv troops tends to be), but when compared with Bleakswords they are far superior due to the special rules and options. That they can also be viewed as acomparison to the Dark Elf Corsairs as well desn't really do them a service in my opinion, as it even undermines the strenghts of the Dark Elves even more...
      I honestly took Armour Piercing on DE crossbows as a given. Even then I'd generally speaking rather take highe elf archers under most conditions tbh.

      4. Apart from the warriors in the core, no. :-) I think the Mistwalkers, the Lords of Aenarion and so on are fluffy and cool inclusions that give the army a bit of diversity but still stay withing what is generally percieved to be within the typical Strengths and weaknesses of the HE army. I quite like what you've done with the book and I don't think anyone could do better (that includes me too, just to be perfectly clear), but when I see something I personally disagree with I will tell you and give you the reasons why and I always will.
      I might not always be able to convince you offcourse, but that is fine too. As I've said before, making the army books a democracy is not a good idea, as you'll then end up with everyone encouraging you to add just about anything to the different armies, resulting in paint jobs of armies being more of a real difference than how the individual amries play on the table. That's why I'm so focussed on armies having individual weaknesses, as they all have their strengths by default.

      Keep up the good work :-)

      Delete
  16. Pleade bring Back zur cityguard?!?!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They will be back in the Dark Elf book, don't worry :)

      Delete
  17. The Warriors addition is a good one, they were present in the Storm of Chaos campaign. By Lore is perfectly understandable. The Druchii are a Legal Evil society where every failure is usually punished by death or worse. The Core troops are seen as "peasants" expendable so the training will be good but not as good as the Asur ones.
    On the other side the Asur are a Legal Neutral army where the Core are seen as the anvil of their armies and the care more about them. So, natality and care are the reasons why the Asur Militia is a little better that the Druchii one.
    BTW I can't understand why the complaint. The Druchii army is more a Raid one with a great number of enslaved beast(Orcs and Humans slaves would be cool too), they don't fight the same way. Asur is more similar to Byzantine one plus Dragons and Magic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The storm of chaos featured a niche type army centered along Sea Lord Aislinn's actions, so it had a much more narrow scope, featuring the Navy and not the Army, and I agree that ore traditional warriors would find a more natural place there alongside the seaguard etc. But that is not the army. You don't see the crew of Bretonnian galleys inthe Bretonnia book either. I don't deny their existence, just the merit if them being in the army book.

      I actually agree that the Asur spearmen might receive a better sort of initial training than the Druchii. However,training can only take you so far and the Druchii is a much more warlike race that would more often see combat and earn valuable real-combat experience. Historicslly the vast majority if HE spearmen would likely not ever see combat at all due to their isolated, non-expansionist nature. Their armies have dwindled every time there has been a period of peace, which there have been many of. I'm just making the point that I'd rather stand beside men with actual combat experience than someone that has had more hours on a prectice field...

      A partion of the Druchii force are raiders yes, but that is only one aspect of the army. If you removed all raiding types from the list, they would still have a seasoned army of more traditional soldiers at their core. They have their cities to defend, not to mention all the vast watchtowers towards the north etc. These would be far more seasoned warriors than fresh-faced HE spearmen, fresh off the prectice fields, generally speaking...

      Slavemasters and slaves could be an interesting addition though, but appropriate models and potentially mixed bases sizes could be an issue.


      Delete
  18. As usual, I'd argue for an inclusive approach :)

    The more models are in the book, the better!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Mathias:

    Due to the complicated nature of the Curse of Aenarion, I have an alternate suggestion:

    Make it a 5+ Ward Save, but if the character already has a Ward Save, increase this by +1, to a maximum of 3+.

    This is simple, removes any how/when to apply the rule issues and do not allow ward saves to stack etc...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem with that is that it makes it too easy to get to a constant 3+ Ward save, which makes the model extremtly hard to kill.

      Delete
    2. If the Lords of Aenarion were limited to Magic Weapons, not items in general, you'd only be left with Tyrion and Teclis to consider. Teclis having 5+ Ward save isnt't the end of the world with his Toughness 2 and Tyrion having 3+ Ward save would likely be preferable to most opponents compared to having to potentially kill him twice with a 2+ ward save...
      It would also remove the roll one save at a time issue.

      Delete
    3. I think 50 pts magic weapons would be fine on the Lords of Aenarion btw, keeping the most powerful weapons out of their hands, yet they would still be more than competent.

      Delete
  20. Why do Shadow Warriors have WS 4? Back in 8th ed they had WS 5(when i remember correctly). Also zur fluff...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I lowered it back to WS4 since they are specialised as archers rather than close combat troops.

      Delete
    2. I think the Shield option stands out as a very odd option on them Mathias. Lugging around a massive shield (on top of a bow) is not exactly common for skirmisher misile infantry in the game.

      Delete
    3. It's not that big a shield really ;)

      I do get your point, but this is really just an option if people want to field the older editions of models.

      Delete