Switch Theme:

Venerable as a squadron leader upgrade.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







One thing that irks me about 7e Space Marines is they can take squadrons of Dreadnoughts, and squadrons of Venerable Dreadnoughts. Something about that feels wrong.

Proposal: Remove the Venerable Dreadnought entry from all Marine codexes altogether. Allow one Dreadnought from any Dreadnought squadron (of any Dreadnought type, be it basic, Ironclad, Furioso, etc) to be upgraded to a Venerable Dreadnought for +25 points, gaining the Character sub-type.

Thoughts?
   
Made in us
Ragin' Ork Dreadnought




 MagicJuggler wrote:
One thing that irks me about 7e Space Marines is they can take squadrons of Dreadnoughts, and squadrons of Venerable Dreadnoughts. Something about that feels wrong.

Proposal: Remove the Venerable Dreadnought entry from all Marine codexes altogether. Allow one Dreadnought from any Dreadnought squadron (of any Dreadnought type, be it basic, Ironclad, Furioso, etc) to be upgraded to a Venerable Dreadnought for +25 points, gaining the Character sub-type.

Thoughts?

Mostly like it, but Ironclad dreadnoughts and other specialty variants shouldn't get the upgrade. Venerable increases durability, adding that to an Ironclad or other bonuses as well makes them extremely difficult to cause any significant damage to with a penetrating hit. Now, that's not as big a balance issue as it would have been a couple editions ago, but it does make the 'Optimized' choice for a dread a lot more clear, which I generally try and avoid.
   
Made in us
The Marine Standing Behind Marneus Calgar





Upstate, New York

I’m torn.

Part of me would like to have the venerable be an upgrade for a normal dread. It would make formations that require a ven dread to be a little more verbose, as they will have to require an upgrade, which they do in the fine print.

Not sure how I feel about the 1 in a squad thing. If you are doing some sort of 1st company list, it makes sense to have multiple vens working together.

Venerable Ironclads should be a thing. But they might need to pay a little extra for the privlage. Adding more durability to a sturdier chassis could make them a tough nut to crack. But then, vehicles are in a bad spot, so I don’t mind seeing them getting a boost.

Overall I think as a rule it would be OK.

   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





I like the idea, but I see a couple possible hangups. Ven dreads still allow you to force rerolls on to vehicle damage results, right? Having to pause to do "damage allocation" one result at a time might be a little time consuming unless a lone ven dread's presence conferred the benefit to his allies? Also, I feel ven dread units should still be an option in their own right.

It's a cool idea in general though.


ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: