Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The idea behind this is to change up the FoC and allow for some new varients for different types of tribes.



First up, an attempt at a Hunter themed army list.

[b]Beast Tamers.[/b]

There are some tribes in which Hunters are less lonesome then in others, in some cases the Tribe's Tyrant may be a former Hunter. Tribes such as these are well known as both proficient hunters as well as tamers of great beasts and they will have a great profusion of beasts both large and small in their caravans of war.

Lords

Tyrant: In addition to his normal options, a Beast Tamer Tyrant has the following options,
May purchase a Harpoon Launcher for 10 points
May ride a Mournfang for 60 pts
May ride a Stonehorn for 250 pts

Slaughtermaster

Heroes

Bruiser: In addition to his normal options, a Beast Tamer Bruiser has the following options,
May purchase a Harpoon Launcher for 10 points
May ride a Mournfang for 50 pts

Butcher
Firebelly
Hunter: In a Beast Tamer army, Hunters lose the Loner special rule


Core units
Gnoblars
Ogres
Ironguts: In a Beast Tamer army, Ironguts gain the following option,
May swap their Great Weapons for a Chaintrap and a hand weapon for no additional cost. They may also purchase an ironfist for 3 pts per model.

Special units

Sabretusks: In a Beast Tamer army, the Special limit on Sabretusks is doubled. So under 3,000 you can have up to 6 units of Sabretusks. In a Grand Army, you may have up to 12.

Harpooneers: A rough equivilant to Leadbeltchers, harpooneers are instead armed with harpoon launchers.

Stats: same as leadbeltchers. Cost 40 pts each, Unit Size: 3+, Equipment: Light Armor, harpoon launcher, hand weapon. Options: Champion 10 pts, Bellower 10 pts

Yhetees
Mournfang Cavelry
Gorger

Rare units

Rhinox Chariot:

Cost: 200 pts

Unit size: 1 chariot
Crew: 2 Ogres
Drawn by: 2 Rhinox
Equipment(Ogres): Hand weapon, Great Throwing Spears
Statline: M(6) WS(3) BS(3) S(5) T(6) W(5) I(2) A(6 from Rhinox, 6 from crew) Ld(7) Note: crew attacks are Str4
Troop Type: Chariot(4+ armor save)
Special Rules: Fear, Large Target, Scythed

Options: Both ogres may swap their Throwing Spears for Harpoon Launchers for 30 points

Gnoblar Scraplauncher
Giant
Thundertusk
Stonehorn

Only thing I would change is ironguts. I would just remove them as it does not really fit their fluff.

Also in my mind a tyrant should be able to ride a mournfang anyway.... Seems stupid to think he cant!

It's a brand new book and I think it's damn good. So most of this stuff I just see as unnecessary.

-No to Harpoon Launchers on anyone except Hunters. Which is one of the primary reasons to take them.
-No to Mournfang mounts. I know you guys like them, but they are the most powerful MC in the game. Asking the question, "Hay, do you want an extra 4 +D3 attacks at Str 5 for 60 or 50 pts with +2 armor?" The answer is always yes unless you're slowed.
-Unless I'm missing something, the Irongut "upgrades" are pretty horrible. If you really want to be beasttamers, they wouldn't have heavy armor/ironguts at all. But from the view so far, this list is the same as the regular one, just better in every way.

That's as far as I read, because I don't really understand what you're getting at other than making extremely powerful Ogres even more powerful.

Follow these steps:
1) Ask yourself if Ogres are HURTING, now. I.e., are they not competitive? I don't think anyone in their right mind could say yes.
2) If they aren't competitive then you can start adding wacky stuff like mournfangs.

Leadbelchers are just an item. There's no reason you can't model them as harpoons. Likewise your heroes/lords can be extra trappy. You an already have 30 Sabertusks in a non Grand Army which is a whole lot of kitties.

First off, this is mostly for fun.

2nd, Hunters suck, even with harpoon launchers. The only way Harpoon launchers would be any good is if you could have a unit of them.

This list loses Leadbeltchers and Ironblasters. Thats a pretty severe hit.

Sabretusks really arn't that great as a ranked up unit. They are best run as singles to get in the way and be chaff.


remember this is for fun, and to console the lovers of Hunter models

Yah, but the big thing is the addition of Mournfangs. Which is tremendous. I mean, really huge.

Hunters aren't so good, but I say take baby steps.

Say something like Hunters can join Gnoblars (!) or Sabertusks and they can become an ambush party giving them...ambush special rule. A Hunter popping behind you with 10 sabertusks and a harpoon or a Stonehorn or a zillion Gnoblars you can't charge because they are trappers, could be interesting.

Most of the stuff you can already do with pure fluffery. But mounts are out for a reason.

Are they?

I mean, why not give a Tyrant or Bruiser a harpoon launcher? It costs more points. So the character costs more. Is he a little better? Sure. But he costs a little more.

The Mournfangs may seem like a bit much, but I think that just speaks of their absurd effectiveness. If letting your characters ride the same things their underlings can ride would make them too good, you can probably assume their underlings are at least a little too good to begin with.

I do think that the list should have some restrictions to make up for the options; maybe Bulls can get chaintraps and Ironguts are out, or something like that. Maybe there's no Firebellies or whatever.
But mostly, I think it's fine. There are more places to spend points. That, in theory, makes the army more flexible. But in truth? I doubt it's much better than the current one. I don't think this is something worth getting up in arms over. It's a game. It's supposed to be fun. The question shouldn't be "why do that", but "why not". Just ask Games Workshop. They straight-up tell you to do this kind of thing in the Core Rulebook.

The Mournfangs may seem like a bit much, but I think that just speaks of their absurd effectiveness. If letting your characters ride the same things their underlings can ride would make them too good, you can probably assume their underlings are at least a little too good to begin with.

This isn't really an argument -for- Mournfangs to be accessible to characters, is it?

I'd say up the Mournfang points cost, and get rid of the Stonehorn mount, which has been proven too powerful for Tyrants.

Good idea with the mournfangs. Ogres need mounts like them.

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:I'd say up the Mournfang points cost, and get rid of the Stonehorn mount, which has been proven too powerful for Tyrants.

Why get rid of the Stonehorn option?

Other armies can get their lords on Dragons(which have roughly equal stats to a Stonehorn, but better WS and I) so why can't we?

Old armies can. Orcs can get on a Wyvern. That's the baddest new 8th mount. And a Tyrant is signifcantly more uber than the baddest melee Orc leader. TK can get on a Warsphinx, however. So I don't know.

Grey Templar wrote:

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:I'd say up the Mournfang points cost, and get rid of the Stonehorn mount, which has been proven too powerful for Tyrants.

Why get rid of the Stonehorn option?

Other armies can get their lords on Dragons(which have roughly equal stats to a Stonehorn, but better WS and I) so why can't we?

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:get rid of the Stonehorn mount, which has been proven too powerful for Tyrants.

Apparently one gaming group judges the OPness of an invented ruleset by seeing how long it can stand up to a Tyrant on Stonehorn.