9 Age
Moderator: Gremlin
Sylvan Elves - Finished proposals week 4 & update weeks 1-2
This topic is not for discussion and will be used only for presenting the final version of a proposal to the RT and for receiving their
response.
@fjugin @lagge @arthain @el rey @Sir_Joker
A. Week 4 Design Change: Cavalry
After analysing the army lists from all tournaments to date, plus internal and external feedback we've come to the conclusion that the Cavalry options of our book need some reworking so as to be able to find their way to more army lists. The main problems according to the community are the role of bigger units of cavalry (MSU seems to be working just fine) as well as their interaction with mounted characters.
Sylvan Elves have always focused on speed and maneuvering, and their character options for mounts reflected this by allowing free reform/fast cavalry. We understand that this is not the way that the RT wants to go with 9th age, and to an extent we agree. However, we'd like to see mounted characters given a role in the army list.
Current Rules (marking only what is relevant):
Proposed changes:
- Grove Riders: Ambush, Fast Cavalry, Spear, Longbow, LA, 18 points/model. May replace Bow with Shield. May replace Fast Cavalry + Ambush with Natural Armour for no extra cost.
- Wild Hunters: Free Reform, Frenzy, Devastating Charge, Spear, LA, 30 points/model. May purchase shields (+3pt/model). May replace Free Reform for Natural Armour for no Extra Cost.
-Sisterhood: 24 points/model, Champion upgrade +50 points
The first two changes aim in creating Medium Cavalry for the Sylvan Elves, while also adressing the issue that our army has with capturing objectives compared to the other armies. It also creates a better environment for mounted characters, since at least the unit they join can now gain rank bonus and disrupt enemy units by flanking them.
The loss of mobility makes up for the added armour these units would enjoy, hence no additional point cost.
The change in Sisterhood is an omission from last week's proposal, and something we discussed with Orion of the Balancing Board. The reasoning was that 170 points for a support caster in the form of the Wizard Conclave was pricy enough, 190 with the price raise would never see the battlefield.
It is following his input that we agreed on a 120 +50 points for champion.
B. Week 1 Counter - Proposal
B.1. Bow of Wyscan: 35 points, Longbow, the bearer may elect to replace his normal shooting attack with Multishot (2d6) S1 poisoned shots.
We increased the point cost of the item and dropped AP(1) from its rules, as per the RT feedback.
B.2. Wardancer Drums: For these we have two proposals, based on whether the Warden's Banner will be changed or not on the BRB:
- if the standard is changed, then we are happy with the Wardancer Drums as they are (grant swiftstride to the bearer's unit, Bladedancers only)
- if the standard remains, then we propose the following change:
55 points, Bladedancer kindred only, Enemy units can only declare a Hold reaction against the bearer's unit. The enemy unit may still declare a flee reaction if subsequently charged by another unit.
We priced the item so as to be useable only by lord-level characters and to allow a flee reaction from a subsequent source, based on last week's feedback.
B.3. Treefolk/Treefolk Elder: Ok with the S4 AP(1) approach and Stubborn in Forests, as agreed last week.
We would only want to know if the RT is inclined to discuss an optional upgrade to S5 for +15 points/model in the same vein as the Kroxigor rule.
This has been a long-standing wish of the community in general. It goes without saying that if this is accepted, we will need to repoint/rethink the Aspect of Entwined Roots (+1 Strength), nobody wants to see s6 Treekin!
C. Week 2 Counter - Proposal
C.1. Pathfinder Kindred: price drop to 30/25 points. The majority of RT members were positive about this in their feedback last week.
C.2. Wildrider Kindred: leave it as is, the issue with mounted characters will be dealt with the inclusion of medium cavalry. (design change of the week)
C.3. Treefolk Elder BSB: In our opinion, giving the Elder access to magical banners is consistency issue, and not a rules design change. At the moment he is the only BSB character in the game who hasn't got access to any magical banners. We will address the potential abuse with aspects by making him use the same allowance for banners and aspects as the other BSBs. (see balance board issues below)
D. Balancing Board issues (this is how BB report has been handled, and will be implemented in the google doc shortly)
D.1. Shapeshifter kindred: Points increase 35/25 to 45/35
The main issue with this kindred was the potential abuse of the Mithril Mail wording by adding the magical Great Weapon for a 1+ save. We have already reported it and it is getting fixed in the rulebook, so we think that a small points increase is enough to balance him for now. A t3 2+/4++ model is nowhere near as powerful as a t3 1+/4++ model.
D.2. Forest Guardian Kindred: Points increase from 30/20 to 40/30
D.3. Great Weapon of Skillfull Defense (= Blade of the Dance): We feel the main abusers were the Bladedancer characters, and this has now been addressed. Increase the lord cost to 50 points for a total cost of 50/40 if you think this is not enough.
D.4. Aspect of Entwined Roots: There is practically no potential for abuse there, since the cost to get 2 of these in an army is prohibitive.(need for 2 Treant Characters with no other aspects). But, we want to fix aspects by making each one of them unique, in the way magic items are. So a blanket: "no duplicates allowed in an army" should do it. No points increase, 70 points is already more than what most people would consider paying for the upgrade.
Finally, in case any of the rules seem underpriced to you, please suggest point costs in the reply. It will facilitate the exchange and speed things up (since, if we agree with the RT's pointing proposal we can implement it directly in the google doc instead of doing this back and forth).
Możliwość posiadania "średnio-lekkiej" kawy z AS 3 + jest nawet fajna , łuk z 2d6 strzałów z poisonami przy odrobinie szczęścia może coś zrobić.
Kwiecień?
Nie wiem w jaki sposób co tydzień zmieniają Ci się zasady - przecież miesiąc są takie same prawie już
Dlatego właśnie przeszli na system tygodniowych updatów aby nie było ciągłej zmiany zasad. To, że wy widzicie proponowane zmiany jest niezamierzone przez RT i jest to klasyczny przeciek a co więcej - większość z tego (z tego co widzę po odpowiedziach RT do naszych propozycji) nie przejdzie do wersji publikowanej i tak
Nie wiem w jaki sposób co tydzień zmieniają Ci się zasady - przecież miesiąc są takie same prawie już
Dlatego właśnie przeszli na system tygodniowych updatów aby nie było ciągłej zmiany zasad. To, że wy widzicie proponowane zmiany jest niezamierzone przez RT i jest to klasyczny przeciek a co więcej - większość z tego (z tego co widzę po odpowiedziach RT do naszych propozycji) nie przejdzie do wersji publikowanej i tak
Na 100% Ci tego nie powiem ale tak mniej więcej bym podejrzewał. Albo, że teraz update, potem poprawka za tydzień-dwa i wtedy dopiero jakiś miesiąc czekania. Nie wiem o czym sobie RT i ExB rozmawiają wewnętrznie a to oni decydują o cyklu wydawniczym (nawet tego nie wiem na pewno).
Mam pytanie odnośnie nowych zasad, a szczególnie nowej amunicji.
Mamy Chieftaina z 3 atakami. Dołożę pathfinder kindred wiec na muliplach ma juz 6. Damy mu Bow of Wyscan wiec z kolejnymi multiplami mam multiplami ma 7 ataków tak??
A co jeśli terz będę chciał użyć jewelweed shot (multiple 2).. Czy wtedy jkazda strzała działa jako 2 multiple i mam 14 ataków? To chyba niemożliwe?
Mamy Chieftaina z 3 atakami. Dołożę pathfinder kindred wiec na muliplach ma juz 6. Damy mu Bow of Wyscan wiec z kolejnymi multiplami mam multiplami ma 7 ataków tak??
A co jeśli terz będę chciał użyć jewelweed shot (multiple 2).. Czy wtedy jkazda strzała działa jako 2 multiple i mam 14 ataków? To chyba niemożliwe?
Nie, masz tylko najwyższy współczynnik czyli ten za łuk 3+1
Nie, ma tylko 4 strzały, multipla z różnych źródeł nie dodajesz do siebie
Niezależnie od liczby ataków na profilu, z łuku możesz strzelić tylko raz, chyba, że masz zasadę multiple. Bow of Wyscan daje multiple (liczba ataków na profilu + 1) dlatego możesz strzelić 4 razy. Ponieważ zasady multiple się nie kumulują stosujesz lepszy czyli ten z Bow of Wyscan.
Składałem rozpiskę na 2,4k skupioną na mocnej magii plus strzelaniu. Bez kawalerii. Wstępnie jedyny klocek do cc, który zakładałem do 6x treekin. Czy w rozpisce strzelającej mimo wszystko przydałoby się włożenie czegoś do cc np. driady albo tancerze? Teraz gdy luki najskuteczniej strzelają na krótkim zasięgu chyba do cc musi dojść i to dośc wcześnie. Z drugiej strony wstawianie klocka do cc to ograniczenie ilości łuków.
Myślicie, że rozpiska w mocnym strzelaniem, magią i bijącymi się jedynie trekinami, drzewcem i jednym klepaczem ma szansę zadziałać na obecnych zasadach?
Myślicie, że rozpiska w mocnym strzelaniem, magią i bijącymi się jedynie trekinami, drzewcem i jednym klepaczem ma szansę zadziałać na obecnych zasadach?
