Points reduction like -20 at least for dread noughts. Or make them naturally venerable are both easy and 'better then nothing fixes.'
Other more intensive fixes would be split fire, or AV +1 all around.
Even a step up from venerable is suffering crew shaken and stunned effects are ignored on 2+ but you still take HP damage, and you ignore your first immobilized result because your second leg kicks in over drive but you only move on a d6 roll but still take HP damage as normal.
As much as I hate it, it's an all-too-common thing in 40k to slap "Monstrous Creature" on something that is neither monstrous nor a creature simply because the rules are good, so it wouldn't be a new thing. Dreadknights and Riptides come to mind.
I hate it because it doesn't make any sense. How come a Riptide can be poisoned and is immune to Haywire, etc? Why does a Riptide's pilot have "more soul" than a Fire Warrior (for things like Spirit Leech)? Of course, this is hardly unique to not-Monstrous-not-Creatures Monstrous Creatures; Necrons, for example, can be poisoned/sickened/feel pain/etc. Still.
Walkers (Dreadnought-style "mechs" as opposed to "turrets with legs" such as War Walkers and Sentinels) need to be fleshed out more. Perhaps their own damage table. Unfortunately this is the sort of thing that will have to wait until 7th Edition unless GW decide to make a walker supplement or something.
The Chaos Dreadnought needs to decide what it wants to do. Making it melee-focused (which the wargear encourages) is severely hindered by the 33% chance that it will roll Fire Frenzy and become unable to do anything for a turn because it gave up its shooting for melee. It can't be shooting-focused, though, not just because of the potential for Blood Rage but because of its very limited selection of guns. The Chaos Dreadnought is attempting to be both shooting and melee at the same time; this just means it is unable to do either effectively.
I really wouldn't mind if the Chaos Dreadnought wasn't just a clone of the Loyalist version, and was instead designed in such a manner that it felt like it was truly an enraged engine of uncontrollable hatred and madness. Instead it just acts completely schizophrenic, which is oddly reflected in both the Crazed! table and the wargear selection.
If anything the Helbrute, deff dread etc are more Monstrous Creature than the bloody Dreadknight and Riptide - their pilots are integrated into the vehicle, while the 'monstrous creatures' are vehicles that are piloted...
These rules are fething garbage. That literally makes zero sense. Might as well make vehicles beasts, and gives swarms an armour value.
I don't think there should be a venerable helbrute option. Chaos legions don't worship and respect those encased within the sarcophagi, they pity them, locked off as they are from the world and driven mad by the experience.
That said, clearly the walker rules do quite work as they should, seen by the numbers of models that should clearly be walkers that are being designated monstrous creatures. A seperate vehicle damage table is a potential aid there. I makes me think that perhaps there should be a few different vehicle damage tables. Walker, flyer, tank, skimmer, all others?
The schizophrenic nature of the helbrute is a holdover from 2nd I feel, where taking various options was useful, instead of the single focus from 3rd on. Taking anti-infantry guns was a good way to soften up or drive up some targets, while your heavy guns were often able to fire on a different class of target.
I think the Crazed table needs some work to back up the goal of a particular helbrute, but it isn't necessarily intended to be a good thing anyway... Perhaps it must retaliate on the last unit to cause a hull poit loss, but you can choose whether to shoot twice, or, run closer then shoot (if within charge range, cannot shoot and must charge)?
Dreadnought CCW:s should cause multiple wounds even if nothing else will. Your flesh monster just got it's guts ruptured by a giant powerfist, "1 wounds buy more MC:s such as riptide".
Rautakanki wrote: Dreadnought CCW:s should cause multiple wounds even if nothing else will. Your flesh monster just got it's guts ruptured by a giant powerfist, "1 wounds buy more MC:s such as riptide".
We need a USR called "Evisceration" that does +D3 wounds upon successful wound.
The main issue with vehicles is that they have no armor save. They function very similarly to a multi wound creature. They have armor which is essentially toughness, they have HPs which are wounds, but they have no armor save! Imagine running your riptide around with no armor save. It would melt just like a dreadnought.
Also, if vehicles had armor saves then we can do away with the AP based modifiers on the damage charts because the AP would very logically come into play when interacting with the vehicles armor save.
I think the whole of the walker type needs a little modification.
They should be near unstoppable in close combat but most easily die to grenades so the first change should be to bring back the old "In close combat grenades only ever hit a walker on a to-hit roll of 6".
I think giving them special damage resistance rules would be very messy, why are they more resistant than a predator/chimera/falcon. We already have different forms of damage resistance in the AV & Hull Points.
One thing that could be done would be to give them all "Skyfire and interceptor in their shooting phase if they didn't move in there preceding movement phase". Might be a little OP but would solve alot of armies anti-air problems and most of their weapons are mounted so they can fire at elevated angles.
Remove Hellbrutes, add in Dreadnoughts as they were, with the 4th edition rules, allow them to be taken in formations, and give them icons boosts, with a point reduction as a FA slot.
To be fair, I haven't even read the 6th edition rules for hellbrutes, but I'm assuming they're garbage since GW hasn't released a plastic kit for them, and as usual, GW is using the creativity of its players as an excuse not to release a dedicated kit.
Captain Fantastic wrote: Remove Hellbrutes, add in Dreadnoughts as they were, with the 4th edition rules, allow them to be taken in formations, and give them icons boosts, with a point reduction as a FA slot.
To be fair, I haven't even read the 6th edition rules for hellbrutes, but I'm assuming they're garbage since GW hasn't released a plastic kit for them, and as usual, GW is using the creativity of its players as an excuse not to release a dedicated kit.
Forgeworld has a nice supply of resin CSM Dreads, designed for each legion.
I think dreads are fine the way the are. Like any other "vehicle" you take, there's a chance of it dying with one hit or 10 hits depends what you shoot at it
Dakkamite wrote: They don't need to be better at close combat - they need to be able to *get* to close combat first and foremost
I don't necessarily agree, most walkers are mixed firepower/assault vehicles so they're going to do something while they advance anyway, but they just get oneshot by monstrous creatures in close combat while needing luck and many turns to kill any MC back. It doesn't seem right.
Though neither does it seem right that a Lascannon simply cannot kill a Carnifex in one shot - what the hell if a flesh monster takes a Lascannon shot to the head it's gonna be dead as gak. But no, in this game you gotta spend the boss monsters energy bar completely and it doesn't even have weak points that do more damage.
GorillaWarfare wrote: The main issue with vehicles is that they have no armor save. They function very similarly to a multi wound creature. They have armor which is essentially toughness, they have HPs which are wounds, but they have no armor save! Imagine running your riptide around with no armor save. It would melt just like a dreadnought.
Also, if vehicles had armor saves then we can do away with the AP based modifiers on the damage charts because the AP would very logically come into play when interacting with the vehicles armor save.
I think this is the simplest and best way to improve vehicles all around in 6th. When you look at vehicles like the Drake and Soulgrinder, or Eldar Skimmers, their extra ability to take Daemon or Jink saves is an important part if their appeal.
I could easily see:
Rhino, Heldrake, Forgefiend, Maulerfiend - 4+
Helbrute, Defiler - 3+
Landraider - 2+
GorillaWarfare wrote: The main issue with vehicles is that they have no armor save. They function very similarly to a multi wound creature. They have armor which is essentially toughness, they have HPs which are wounds, but they have no armor save! Imagine running your riptide around with no armor save. It would melt just like a dreadnought.
Also, if vehicles had armor saves then we can do away with the AP based modifiers on the damage charts because the AP would very logically come into play when interacting with the vehicles armor save.
I think this is the simplest and best way to improve vehicles all around in 6th. When you look at vehicles like the Drake and Soulgrinder, or Eldar Skimmers, their extra ability to take Daemon or Jink saves is an important part if their appeal.
I could easily see:
Rhino, Heldrake, Forgefiend, Maulerfiend - 4+
Helbrute, Defiler - 3+
Landraider - 2+
Just for the Chaos Codex.
And then we'd be competitive! As long as no other army gets the saves that is...
Crazed: Treat the ‘Fire Frenzy’ result as ‘Blood Rage’ if the Helbrute was bought with two melee weapons. Treat the ‘Blood Rage’ result as ‘Fire Frenzy’ if the Helbrute was bought with no melee weapons.
There, Crazed is fixed. Now we just need to fix the fact that it's a Dreadnought and dies to everything anyway.
Dakkamite wrote: They don't need to be better at close combat - they need to be able to *get* to close combat first and foremost
This is a problem that all melee units without a decent delivery system have and isn't unique to dreadnoughts. The way I see it is that you either need a system-side fix for that problem or you compensate affected units with delivery systems or cost decreases as appropriate.
Dakkamite wrote: They don't need to be better at close combat - they need to be able to *get* to close combat first and foremost
The problem is that right now there's little or no incentive to try to get them into close combat. You're not going to do very much with your laughable 2-4 attacks, so the only viable use for a dread is putting guns on it and shooting stuff. Making it easier to get that laughable damage into combat doesn't change the fundamental problem.
GorillaWarfare wrote: The main issue with vehicles is that they have no armor save. They function very similarly to a multi wound creature. They have armor which is essentially toughness, they have HPs which are wounds, but they have no armor save! Imagine running your riptide around with no armor save. It would melt just like a dreadnought.
Also, if vehicles had armor saves then we can do away with the AP based modifiers on the damage charts because the AP would very logically come into play when interacting with the vehicles armor save.
I think this is the simplest and best way to improve vehicles all around in 6th. When you look at vehicles like the Drake and Soulgrinder, or Eldar Skimmers, their extra ability to take Daemon or Jink saves is an important part if their appeal.
I could easily see:
Rhino, Heldrake, Forgefiend, Maulerfiend - 4+
Helbrute, Defiler - 3+
Landraider - 2+
Just for the Chaos Codex.
Yup, kind of what I was thinking. Of course, with the rules as is, most weapons that you shoot at these tanks would eliminate the armour save anyway. Something like this would require changes in other place to be effective.
As for a one shot change to dreadnoughts, perhaps AV 13/12/11 and a points adjustment to compensate.
Dakkamite wrote: They don't need to be better at close combat - they need to be able to *get* to close combat first and foremost
This totally deserves to be exalted. It's so true though.
On a side note I think it should do more damage in melee like it can have two attacks but 1 wound causes 2 or just d3 wounds like someone else mentioned.
Dakkamite wrote: They don't need to be better at close combat - they need to be able to *get* to close combat first and foremost
This totally deserves to be exalted. It's so true though.
On a side note I think it should do more damage in melee like it can have two attacks but 1 wound causes 2 or just d3 wounds like someone else mentioned.
The only type of opponent this would serve against is HQ and MC. How would causing two or more wounds per successful attack actually make the dreadnought more useful? Are melee with characters and monstrous creatures really their problem? Really, is it the dreadnought's shortcoming or does it just so happen that there's a few too many MCs in this edition? That last one is actually a serious question, because if it is the latter then the Dreadnought sure as hell shouldn't cause more wounds per failed save.
I went through the comparatives between a Dread and an MC, and really now, there's not much difference! A Dreadnought typically has a toughness that is more equivalent of a Wraithlord, i.e. significantly higher than the average MC, but no save. For slightly lower cost it also comes without Smash but has a Power Fist that gets one attack less - so it's always smashing at initiative 1 instead of 4+. Armament options are slightly worse for shooting, but the Wraithlord actually has to pay for a heavy weapon to begin with - albeit this is hard to compare.
Why do I compare with the Wraithlord? I like the Wraithlord and seldom find them to be bad value in my non-Iyanden non-Wraithseer lists.
Really, all I can justify for the Dreadnought variants (in Space Wolf and Space Marine (latest) codex) is a point drop by at the very most 20 points, and that's pushing it. Mechanical problems of delivery is an edition thing - but then again you actually get a transport for the bloody things and drop pod as well! Maybe, just maybe, it needs another attack in close combat, but I'm retracting the point discount in that case.
It's not meant to be your go-to solution for the Wraithknight/Riptide problem!
(Sorry for just quoting you, Dat Guy, there's other I address as well)
Dakkamite wrote: They don't need to be better at close combat - they need to be able to *get* to close combat first and foremost
This totally deserves to be exalted. It's so true though.
On a side note I think it should do more damage in melee like it can have two attacks but 1 wound causes 2 or just d3 wounds like someone else mentioned.
The only type of opponent this would serve against is HQ and MC. How would causing two or more wounds per successful attack actually make the dreadnought more useful? Are melee with characters and monstrous creatures really their problem? Really, is it the dreadnought's shortcoming or does it just so happen that there's a few too many MCs in this edition? That last one is actually a serious question, because if it is the latter then the Dreadnought sure as hell shouldn't cause more wounds per failed save.
I went through the comparatives between a Dread and an MC, and really now, there's not much difference! A Dreadnought typically has a toughness that is more equivalent of a Wraithlord, i.e. significantly higher than the average MC, but no save. For slightly lower cost it also comes without Smash but has a Power Fist that gets one attack less - so it's always smashing at initiative 1 instead of 4+. Armament options are slightly worse for shooting, but the Wraithlord actually has to pay for a heavy weapon to begin with - albeit this is hard to compare.
Why do I compare with the Wraithlord? I like the Wraithlord and seldom find them to be bad value in my non-Iyanden non-Wraithseer lists.
Really, all I can justify for the Dreadnought variants (in Space Wolf and Space Marine (latest) codex) is a point drop by at the very most 20 points, and that's pushing it. Mechanical problems of delivery is an edition thing - but then again you actually get a transport for the bloody things and drop pod as well! Maybe, just maybe, it needs another attack in close combat, but I'm retracting the point discount in that case.
It's not meant to be your go-to solution for the Wraithknight/Riptide problem!
(Sorry for just quoting you, Dat Guy, there's other I address as well)
If it causes D3 wounds per wound, I imagine he meant it in the way that it would cause D3 dead grunts per wound. That is certainly not useless.
In that case, what would you recognise as a decent price for a basic dreadnought? 'cause prices can only go up with an ability like that. Also, that ability smells like Chaos Daemon or Ork.
Just increase number of attacks by one in that case. It's not quite the same as doubling the number of attacks by rolling another set of dice, but roughly the equivalent of a 15 to 20 point free upgrade and lands the Dreadnought close to the performance of a Wraithlord.
Mahtamori wrote: In that case, what would you recognise as a decent price for a basic dreadnought? 'cause prices can only go up with an ability like that. Also, that ability smells like Chaos Daemon or Ork.
Just increase number of attacks by one in that case. It's not quite the same as doubling the number of attacks by rolling another set of dice, but roughly the equivalent of a 15 to 20 point free upgrade and lands the Dreadnought close to the performance of a Wraithlord.
I'd take the +1A. Sounds like a useful bonus.
I still have the problem of T1 lascannon, and no counter gunline, however.
I don't think they need more attacks. personally i feel they are just not survivable enough.
pretty much the only ones used are the ironclad, and only because small arms and tau interceptor cant pen them.
really they need an armor save or be changed to a T based model, probably start with T8 for av 12, with any to wounds greater than what would be needed causing some extra table or something. (though it never made sense that a riptide getting missed to the knee can still move unhindered. )
T6 with 3 wounds and 3+ save is the equivalent and, I'm afraid, the standard. T8 is reserved for stuff made from the hardest material in the universe and T7 is reserved for stuff made by the most vicious and cunning engineers in the universe. Humans have access to neither (and let's ignore parody armoured armour armour Grey Knights for a second). Maybe Mars has access to robots that would merit T7 or even T8, but that's not Astartes.
Also, being a toughness based model is a travesty for the Rip Tide and whateverGreyKnightsthingiscalled and it stretches the imagination for the Wraith-models.
Bottom line is, they're not all that worse for wear. Maybe a bit costly, but nothing about them merits a paradigm shift.
P.s. The normal Dread is also immune to small arms. You need IG sentinels or Eldar War Walkers to find stuff that's susceptible to small arms (i.e. large sized automatic rocket propelled grenade launchers. Real small arms can't scratch even Sentinels).
You need massive high-tech laser batteries to scratch Dreads, and cannons or missiles to pen them.
But a Dread is basically made of terminator armor >or the other way around? and besides that t8 would make it equivalent as it takes st 7 a 5 to wound t 8 which is what it takes to glance av 12. same stst 8 and so on while it is immune to st 4 or less. (surprised about st 5 needing 6s) but i suppose with an armor save its much diffrent.
its all a damn mess and my dreads dont really ever see play. and wont till things change.
A reccurent rant about the difference of MC's and Walkers, are that WAlkers can have permanent Damages that debilitate them, while MC's till their last Wound act has normal.
Then why not create a new type of unit for those MC's that are War machines?
Monstruous Walkers; the unit is treated like a MC, but if they are at/under 50% of their starting Wounds, they roll on the Vehicle damage chart, you apply the effects of the damages has normal, occurence of a damages making you loose an HP, you instead Loose a Wound.
Rules and items/attacks that only affects Walkers, also affects Monstruous Walkers.
Now their can be a variety of when and how the rolls on the damage chart are made.
Another way to do it would be "...If a Monstruous Walkers suffers the lose of a Wound from a weapon that has his Strength equal or higher then the MW Thougness, the MW makes a roll on the vehicle damage chart..."
It would make things Like Riptides, Wratihlords/knights and Dreadknights on a much more even level regarding their durability.
Honestly, a point reduction would do it for me. Fifteen to twenty points should be sufficient. Normally I'm not that into dropping points or abandoning units as bad choices, but I've put some serious effort into this, and dreadnoughts definitely need some work. I'd play them if they remade them as MCs, but I'd feel dirty about it.
Really, all I would do would just change how ALL vehicles are damaged, kind of like a mix between 5th and 6th vehicle damage. For example:
Vehicles no longer lose hull points on all glancing hits, however they roll on a glance damage chart
When a vehicles suffers a glancing hit roll on the following table:
1-2 Shaken
3-4 Stunned
5 Weapon Destroyed, -1 HP 6+ Immobilised, -1 HP
When a vehicles suffers a penetrating hit it loses 1 HP. In addition, roll on the following table:
Monstruous Walkers; the unit is treated like a MC, but if they are at/under 50% of their starting Wounds, they roll on the Vehicle damage chart, you apply the effects of the damages has normal, occurence of a damages making you loose an HP, you instead Loose a Wound.
It would be rather interesting to have exploding carnifexes
Ok, if people are proposing ripping up the current vehicle vs. monstrous creature distinction and writing new rules -- to which I heartily say "amen" -- y'all really need to look at the "Vehicles are People too" discussion in the 100 Heresies thread, beginning with the end of this post of mine that kicked off a whole discussion about vehicles with Toughness and Wounds....
I think this goes beyond just fixing Dreadnaughts, but it is true that Dreadnaughts have their own unique issues.
The problem is that 6th edition gakked Vehicles overall, and made Monstrous Creatures way too strong. Both those unit types need a rework.
Vehicles:
Boons:
Glancing hits no longer cause status effects
Increased Flat Out options
Snapshots for moving and firing
12" assault range helps Dreadnaughts
Penalties:
Hull Points mean most vehicles can be killed with only 2-3 glancing hits. Penetrating hits aren't necessary to kill vehicles anymore at all.
Vehicles can be hit easier by grenades
Vehicles are much easier to hit in assault
Rework of the Damage table means that "Explodes" is much more common on all penetrating hits. (For example on a Battlewagon, any AP2 weapon penetrating hit causes Explodes! on 4+)
(There are others but this is a brief summary, I'm not even getting into Transports)
Monstrous Creatures:
Boons:
Now get cover easily
Smash (Really the benefits of this can't be overstated. It's incredibly powerful)
12" Assault range means it's easier for them to assault.
Flying Monstrous Creatures have 360 degree arcs of fire.
Hammer of wrath
Fear
Penalties:
???
* * *
I've thought of many ways to revamp Vehicles to make them useful again, and make them worth taking vs Monstrous Creatures, which are superior in almost all instances. Mostly they need to be more survivable.
When all the Hull Points on a vehicle have been removed, it is no longer Wrecked. Instead, from that point onwards, all Glancing Hits automatically cause Penetrating Hits, with +1 to the Damage Table. All future Penetrating Hits also add +1 to the damage table.
Remove the +1 to the damage table for AP2 weapons
A Vehicle that moves counts as WS 3. Skimmer type adds +3 to WS. A Fast type adds +3 to WS. (Thus a Fast Skimmer that moves has WS9).
* * *
I've also thought of nerfing Monstrous Creatures, specifically SMASH.
Smash Attacks are resolved at S10, I1, and become AP3. Monstrous Creatures aren't able to benefit as much from their pincers, swords, and other destructive wargear when they are simply throwing their mass behind a strong blow to the enemy. When not using it's Smash attacks, normal attacks are still resolved at AP2.
Like above id like to see vehicles rolling on the damamge chart after all hull points are gone. but then you lose out on wrecked vehicles.
perhaps bringing back the older damage chart would do.
probably leave the +1 +2 for ap 1 and 2 though
WS 3 - 9 i dont know seems excessive. especially considering how much it can boost wave serpents which are already annoying.
My personal preference, Give vehicles armor saves. (it makes no sense that the same ceramite plates on a power armor gives a 3+ vs an auto cannon but doesnt against a rhino.)
MC: easy fix remove AP 2 from all attacks and leave it only for smash. id say for all multi wound models give em there own chart of damage so they can be stunned and stuff mabye? MC should never benefit from area terrain that is stupid.
What I'd do about exploding vehicles is to keep the vehicle damage table from 6th Edition, but I'd change the value of 6 from "Explodes!" to "Wrecked". Then what I'd do is say that whenever a vehicle is Wrecked, roll a D6. On a 5+, the vehicle explodes.
This does two things. It makes it such that tons of modifications to the damage chart don't automatically result in vehicle explosions. Also, it prevents multiple penetrating hits from having an increased chance to cause an explosion. You just roll once whenever the vehicle is wrecked.
The main reason I don't feel AP2 weapons need a +1 on the damage chart is because most high strength weapons already have enough vehicle killing power by virtue of their high strength. I don't think they need an additional buff to the damage chart on top of that.
As for the Helbrute model, GW could do the same thing they do with vehicles. Just make a Chaos Dreadnought upgrade sprue and include it with one of the loyalist Dreadnought kits (probably the Venerable Dreadnought, since it has most of the Helbrute wargear options already in it). There, done. Needn't be more complicated than that.
You'd be surprised at what a small bunch of points in reduced price can do. Might mean you can fit in that missile launcher which ultimately keeps your dread safe to do it's job.
Slayer le boucher wrote:Carnifexes in this use of the rule, wouldn't be a Monstruous walker.
Monstruous Walker rule would be given to models that looks like a giant freakin robot, but that is a MC instead.
Namely, Riptides, Wratihlords/Knight, Dreadknight, Deamon Engines maybe, DE Talos and Cronos, but not really sure about those...
Pretty spot on on all of them.
You can discuss Wraithlord and the Dark Eldar equivalents due to lack of pilots, but otherwise yes. Wraithknight would have a mandatory Spirit Stone, of course, but it does have a pilot.
SisterSydney wrote:Ok, if people are proposing ripping up the current vehicle vs. monstrous creature distinction and writing new rules -- to which I heartily say "amen" -- y'all really need to look at the "Vehicles are People too" discussion in the 100 Heresies thread, beginning with the end of this post of mine that kicked off a whole discussion about vehicles with Toughness and Wounds....
That thought line has been around for more than a decade and began somewhere around Eldar's 3rd edition codex. Essentially, people have been disagreeing with Wraithlords being monsters for a long long time. Then again, the machine is their flesh, and there's no pilot inside.
I still don't know how'd you fix Penitent Engines. They're open topped walkers that are supposed to run into CC, but many small arms can shoot them to pieces and if its assaulting a squad with krack grenades? Forget about it.
If there was a candidate for the MC conversion, it would be it.
My IF army runs 5 rifledreads and armor saturations works alright. It's not a super win win army, but I have fun.
Jefffar wrote: I think that the OP should prove Dreads are broken or at least explain the reason for thinking so before looking for ideas to fix them.
Well, I can only really speak for Helbrutes, but dreadnoughts are incapable of surviving much of anything, and they make for pretty terrible fire support.
They're a 100+ point unit that moves ~6" per turn, and is incapable of achieving it's point's worth. You can give them 1-2 guns, which, for their cost, are easily outclassed by other shooting units, and the only reason to take them for CC is if you constantly face Orks.
Just add the same rules the contemptor has, keep price the same and it's worth it's 100pts, up the contemptor to 4++ shooting and 5++ combat and it's suddenly worth it's 175pts, both are so overcosted
How is a Riptide a monstrous creature, and a hellbrute (specifically the actual hellbrute model) NOT a monstrous creature? And why don't hellbrutes have marks? Some marks granting fleet, hatred, IWND or shrouded would really help.
Musashi363 wrote: How is a Riptide a monstrous creature, and a hellbrute (specifically the actual hellbrute model) NOT a monstrous creature? And why don't hellbrutes have marks? Some marks granting fleet, hatred, IWND or shrouded would really help.
I know, right?
I have no idea wtf Phil Kelly was thinking when he wrote the codex, or what the Tau codex's writer when he was writing that codex, but these things make little to no sense...
Unit Type: Monstrous Creature, Rampaging Monstrosity [The Helbrute moves +D6" in the movement phase, and can re-roll the dice to move through cover]
Special Rules: Daemon, Fearless, VotLW, IWND Crazed [When the Helbrute takes an unsaved wound, roll a D3:
1: Fire Frenzy - During the Helbrute's next shooting phase, all of it's guns gain the Twin-Linked rule.
2: Rising Fury - During the Helbrute's next assault phase, it gains: +1 I, +2 A.
3: Blood Rage - During the Helbrute's next turn, it gains the following: +1 I, +3 A, Fleet.
Wargear:
CCW, Multi-Melta
Options: (Same as normal, except it can't take vehicle upgrades)
-May take one of the following:
Brute of Nurgle [Helbrute gains Shrouded, +1T, Blight Grenades]
Brute of Khorne [Helbrute gains Furious Charge, Rage, +1A, Fleshbane]
Brute of Tzeentch [Helbrute gains +1 to his Inv save, may re-roll any two dice per turn relating to the Helbrute]
Brute of Slaanesh [Helbrute gains +2 I, and moves +2D6 in the movement phase, rather than +1D6]
I really like how the Dreadnought works in Dawn of War II. In that game, walkers tend to be tougher than tanks, but compensate by often having limited ranged capabilities and slower speed than their tank brethren. So, a Predator can kite a Deff Dread to oblivion, but if you get a unit of Tankbustas in there, the Predator will go down fast whereas the Deff Dread is likely to survive all the way to melee.
The Chaos Dreadnought/Helbrute in particular. With the MoT missile launcher it becomes a nasty tough anti-vehicle platform that is slow but somewhat capable in melee, but with MoK dual claws and Blood Rage it becomes a very deadly and tough combat monster that is difficult to control.
An example of what I'd love:
Mark of Khorne: Grants the Blood Rage ability.
Blood Rage: Can be activated at the start of any movement phase. Sends the Helbrute into a berserker rampage. The mindless rage gives the Helbrute a 4+ invulnerable save as well as the Rage, Rampage, Shred, Fleet and Counter-attack special rules. However, while Blood Rage is active, the Helbrute is absolutely uncontrollable. It must move as far as possible against the nearest unit (Friend or enemy) and charge it in the following assault phase if within range, and run against it if not. At the beginning of the next friendly movement phase, roll a D6: On a roll of a 1-4 Blood Rage ends and may not be reused this turn, but on a 5+ it continues.
May need reworking, but what do you think of the base concept?
Drop it to 65pts with dccw, storm bolter & multimelta/twin HB/autocannon/assault cannon. '
+5pts for plasma, +10pts for lascannon.
Missile launcher/autocannon left arm exchange for free.
+10pts for underslung heavy flamer/melta
+20pts for venerable
Let it use chapter tactics like it was a centurion.
Really this alone would make all vehicles work better.
It gives you a chance at surviving auto cannon spam, and would actually make it relevant to take low ap weapons like the heavy rail rifles.
Really this alone would make all vehicles work better.
It gives you a chance at surviving auto cannon spam, and would actually make it relevant to take low ap weapons like the heavy rail rifles.
Probably 2+ for dreads 3+ for rhino types.
That's actually not TOO bad an idea. Considering the fact that the "nerf" to vehicles was essentially giving them a wounds value without giving them a Save value. Going back and giving all vehicles an Armor save would go a long ways towards equalizing them with Monstrous Creatures.
However, then I think you're just turning Vehicles into Monstrous Creatures. That alone should tell us that something is seriously gakked with the way vehicles work in the game, when we're looking at fixing them by making them more like MC and less like vehicles. Monstrous Creatures need toned down, and Vehicles need to be made distinct from them. I think Hull Points was a good idea for 6th Edition to make vehicles more killable than they used to be. One problem is that I think ALL vehicles really need MORE hull points. More hull points would give players an incentive to go for those penetrating hits... to get those one-shot explosions. But with the new damage table and hull points, combined with the fact that most high strength weapons are one-shot, when you've got autocannons that have four... it's just easier to go for Hull Points instead. TOO EASY.
Meanwhile Monstrous Creatures that have more benefits than vehicles start getting written into codexes that have 5 and 6 wounds, armour saves, and they're awesome in assault to boot! No wonder Dreadnaughts suck in comparison.
Armour save is interesting because it addresses casual anti-vehicle weapons (krak grenades, scatter lasers, etc) without challenging dedicated anti-vehicle weapons (melta bombs, rokkit launchas, etc).
Simply more hull points is interesting in that it just ups what it takes to kill a vehicle.
Doesn't directly fix Dreadnoughts, of course, but benefits all vehicles which are struggling.
Quite frankly I'm a bit partial to the armour save idea since I'm so annoyed at the "hits rear" rule, which in itself makes no sense because this 30-man pile of green-skins is trying to use axes against a space-flight capable grav-tank - they can't all fit in the rear and even if they could they'd be hard pressed to actually find something that's vulnerable.
Will still not matter against the Nob, of course.
Bringing crew shaken back on a glance may be a mitigation?
What I'm not so sure about is the AV14 vehicles, though. There's a huge difference between AV12->13 and even larger AV13->14
Honestly i though it was justified in that the models are actually climbing all over the place punching out lenses and jamming grenades into places that dont belong.
Doesn't directly fix Dreadnoughts, of course, but benefits all vehicles which are struggling.
Quite frankly I'm a bit partial to the armour save idea since I'm so annoyed at the "hits rear" rule, which in itself makes no sense because this 30-man pile of green-skins is trying to use axes against a space-flight capable grav-tank - they can't all fit in the rear and even if they could they'd be hard pressed to actually find something that's vulnerable.
Will still not matter against the Nob, of course.
One thing that I've been saying since 5th Edition is that I wish in melee vehicles were hit on the armour facing that the attacker was actually attacking. So if you're attacking a Wave Serpent in the front arc, you have to beat the AV12. My personal idea is that instead of having all melee attacks hit the rear of a vehicle demonstrating that they are hitting vulnerable areas, they should get a -2 modifier on the AV they are striking, to represent the fact that they are hitting vulnerable spots, like firing into viewports and shoving grenades into engines, that sort of thing.
There are several things I like about this rule.
1) Gives AV14 vehicles something to be scared of. In melee they'd get hit at AV12.
2) It rewards more strategy on the part of the attacker. If you can actually get rear hits on a vehicle, now you're hitting at AV8!
3) AV 13 and 14 tanks are now more appropriately less vulnerable to melee attacks in their front facing where they are more heavily armoured.
The bad things?
1) I think it punishes weak vehicles like AV10 open-topped vehicles too much. They'd be much too weak.
2) in a large melee it would be too time consuming to figure out which model was hitting which facing of the vehicle.
It's this last #2 bad thing which is the reason I'm pretty sure the game designers would never consider anything like this. It'd just be way too cumbersome, slow the game down too much, and cause too many disputes.
Murrdox wrote:
However, then I think you're just turning Vehicles into Monstrous Creatures. That alone should tell us that something is seriously gakked with the way vehicles work in the game, when we're looking at fixing them by making them more like MC and less like vehicles. Monstrous Creatures need toned down, and Vehicles need to be made distinct from them. I think Hull Points was a good idea for 6th Edition to make vehicles more killable than they used to be. One problem is that I think ALL vehicles really need MORE hull points. More hull points would give players an incentive to go for those penetrating hits... to get those one-shot explosions. But with the new damage table and hull points, combined with the fact that most high strength weapons are one-shot, when you've got autocannons that have four... it's just easier to go for Hull Points instead. TOO EASY.
Mahtamori wrote:Armour save is interesting because it addresses casual anti-vehicle weapons (krak grenades, scatter lasers, etc) without challenging dedicated anti-vehicle weapons (melta bombs, rokkit launchas, etc).
Simply more hull points is interesting in that it just ups what it takes to kill a vehicle.
Rolling a 4+ to remove a hull point on a glance would be a quick and dirty fix without redoing all the vehicle entries. You double the amount of glances (on average) that you need to take down a vehicle, while leaving penetrating hits just as effective as they are now. Plus you can add special rules that can modify the new roll on weapons or vehicles. Hell, most of the rules that "ignore shaken or stunned" for a vehicle could be changed to -x on the roll to remove a hull point on a glance this would make them much more relevant.
Mahtamori wrote:Bringing crew shaken back on a glance may be a mitigation?
Stunlocking vehicles needed to go, no need to bring it back.
Instead of adding yet another fething die roll to this game, how about we get rid of glancing hits altogether? You penetrate the armor or nothing happens.
Rolling a 4+ to remove a hull point on a glance would be a quick and dirty fix without redoing all the vehicle entries. You double the amount of glances (on average) that you need to take down a vehicle, while leaving penetrating hits just as effective as they are now. Plus you can add special rules that can modify the new roll on weapons or vehicles. Hell, most of the rules that "ignore shaken or stunned" for a vehicle could be changed to -x on the roll to remove a hull point on a glance this would make them much more relevant.
That's another reason I hate the Hull Point system. All special rules for negating the effects of penetrating hits basically become useless. In 6th edition, 4/5 times a vehicle is Hull Pointed to death, in my experience. What's the point of paying for Armour Plates, or Grot Riggers, or Spirit Stones anymore?
Back in 5th Edition, I loved being able to use my Grot Riggers to restart a Battlewagon that was immobilized in the middle of the board. It made for some great, fun gaming moments. Those type of moments just don't happen anymore in 6th Edition. It's LESS FUN.
SisterSydney wrote: Instead of adding yet another fething die roll to this game, how about we get rid of glancing hits altogether? You penetrate the armor or nothing happens.
I like this a lot. It wouldn't be easy but it makes so much more sense to me.
SisterSydney wrote: Instead of adding yet another fething die roll to this game, how about we get rid of glancing hits altogether? You penetrate the armor or nothing happens.
If we're chucking tradition and die rolls out the window the best system would be subtracting S+d6 from AV and comparing that to a table of results.
Yes, death to tradition. But apparently subtraction is harder for most people (myself included) than addition -- best to avoid it in game design.
robam45 wrote:
SisterSydney wrote: Instead of adding yet another fething die roll to this game, how about we get rid of glancing hits altogether? You penetrate the armor or nothing happens.
I like this a lot. It wouldn't be easy but it makes so much more sense to me.
Thanks. But why wouldn't it be easy? Is there anything but force of habit in the way?
Jefffar wrote:At that point makes sense just to translate AVs into T values
Yes! This! This. Is. Simpler.
I have no idea why whoever added vehicle rules to the basic "WHFB In Space" ruleset decided to come up with an entire separate set of mechanics. If he (almost certainly a he) had been lazier and just said "yeah vehicles are just big square cavalry with stats like everything else, I'm done, off to the pub now" we'd be much better off.
I would be happy with seeing grenades hit on 6's in melee, and possibly the inclusion of Walkers gaining Rampage.
If you're in a huge, towering vehicle with often a very large weapon, you'd be swinging that thing in cleaving attacks rather than in single strikes. Rampage could help represent that.
SisterSydney wrote: Instead of adding yet another fething die roll to this game, how about we get rid of glancing hits altogether? You penetrate the armor or nothing happens.
Fixing Dreadnaughts can only be done in 1 of 2 ways
1) make it a Wraithlord
2) or up it to AV 13/13/12
This is all because Shooting with krak grenades has made anything AV 12/12/10 a total joke , even if Dreadnaughts were free they would still use up a slot on the FOC. They still have the problem of there just free kill point in most games. I think only Orks & Nids can't have krak grenades(or better EMP, Haywire) on there Troops & most of the time grenades are free or with IG less then 1 point each.
Not sure if its been stated but in the original Rogue Trader rules all vehicles had a toughness and wounds characteristic. There was no distinction between vehicle or monstrous creature. Obviously you could just do three toughness values for a vehicle based on its facing or whatnot. Specifically as to dreadnoughts, somewhere earlier someone posted a correct assesment that dreadnoughts are more akin to MC's than Riptides are. The riptide should be an AV 13 jump-walker thing. Make dreads T6 MC's. Honestly i'm ok with the Wraithknight and Wraithlords since they are sort of controlled by a fully integraded spirit stone network or whatever (black magic says I). Ork dreds.....not sure...I'm thinking they are still vehicles with an ork or grot in there pulling levers and gears. Sentinels are definately vehicles.
I think it would be ok so long as there is a another chart for them. say On a roll of a 6, its critical hit that rolls on the damage chart (which mostly would work the same) but then fix explosion into deals additional wounds (D3 maybe)
Fixing Dreadnoughts
AV 12/12/11, 3 HP WS5/BS4/I4/A3 base
Move Through Cover, Hammer of Wrath D3, Smash
6+ Invulnerable Save
Even in Death I Serve: If a Dreadnought is reduced to 0HP (not as the result of an Explodes! Result), roll a D6. On a 3+ the hit is ignored as the Dreadnought goes into a frenzy. It may act as normal during your next turn. At the end of your next turn, it becomes a Wreck
How a single, brutal table that brings vehicles, monsters, and multi-wound models all in line:
1 - Drive on: No additional effects.
2 - Shaken: The model is reduced to WS:1, BS:1 until the end of its next turn.
3 - Stunned: The model may neither move nor attack until the end of its next turn. Exception: a Zooming Flyer must move exactly 18" in a straight line without turning.
4 - Disarmed: The model loses one weapon, item of wargear, special rule, or attack of the enemy player's choice.
5 - Immobilized. The model may not move for the rest of the game. If already immobilized, the model loses an additional Wound/Hull Point. A Flying Monstrous Creature is grounded. A vehicle Flyer Crashes and Burns. [Note: A little nerf to flyers here -- more than justified!]
6 - Critical: The model loses an additional Wound and rolls on this table again.
How a single, brutal table that brings vehicles, monsters, and multi-wound models all in line:
1 - Drive on: No additional effects.
2 - Shaken: The model is reduced to WS:1, BS:1 until the end of its next turn.
3 - Stunned: The model may neither move nor attack until the end of its next turn. Exception: a Zooming Flyer must move exactly 18" in a straight line without turning.
4 - Disarmed: The model loses one weapon, item of wargear, special rule, or attack of the enemy player's choice.
5 - Immobilized. The model may not move for the rest of the game. If already immobilized, the model loses an additional Wound/Hull Point. A Flying Monstrous Creature is grounded. A vehicle Flyer Crashes and Burns. [Note: A little nerf to flyers here -- more than justified!]
6 - Critical: The model loses an additional Wound and rolls on this table again.
SisterSydney wrote: Instead of adding yet another fething die roll to this game, how about we get rid of glancing hits altogether? You penetrate the armor or nothing happens
Well, there goes necron's only real way of dealing with vehicles at range. There's a reason why they don't have that much dedicated AT compared to other armies.
I'm not saying get rid of hull points -- I think they're fine -- but just to make glancing hits go away, i.e. IF penetration roll = AV, THEN no effect.
SisterSydney wrote: I'm not saying get rid of hull points -- I think they're fine -- but just to make glancing hits go away, i.e. IF penetration roll = AV, THEN no effect.
Yes, but the Gauss rule causes glancing hits on a 6. That's the wording
Though to be honest, I never quite understood the concept of glancing. If it's glancing, it didn't really damage the tank that much, did it? Maybe scratch it, but not enough to actually do anything. Maybe I'm just visualizing it wrong.
How a single, brutal table that brings vehicles, monsters, and multi-wound models all in line:
1 - Drive on: No additional effects.
2 - Shaken: The model is reduced to WS:1, BS:1 until the end of its next turn.
3 - Stunned: The model may neither move nor attack until the end of its next turn. Exception: a Zooming Flyer must move exactly 18" in a straight line without turning.
4 - Disarmed: The model loses one weapon, item of wargear, special rule, or attack of the enemy player's choice.
5 - Immobilized. The model may not move for the rest of the game. If already immobilized, the model loses an additional Wound/Hull Point. A Flying Monstrous Creature is grounded. A vehicle Flyer Crashes and Burns. [Note: A little nerf to flyers here -- more than justified!]
6 - Critical: The model loses an additional Wound and rolls on this table again.
Dreadnoughts are veterans of thousands of campaigns, Bjorn was alive at the same time as leman Russ and knew him personally. Walker rules are fine we don't need an enormous fix or rewrite of the entire rule book. Only veteran marines who's lives are worth preserving become a dreadnought yet although the fluff gifts them with eons of experience when it comes to the crunch we have a standard marine statline except with 2 attacks. When I rise to power those of so little imagination will be purged as heretics.
Veteran of countless wars
A dreadnought is a veteran of a thousand battles, only those of great standing are consent to exist as such.
When a dreadnought is bought choose one of the following
Marksman (a true sharpshooter lies within his shots finds all marks)
The dreadnought and all friendly models in 6inches gain prefered enemy.
Champion ( inside the sarcophagus lies the remains of a great warrior)
The dreadnought gains the rampage special rule friendly models in the same combat as the dreadnought gain hatred. Also he is treated as a character for the purposes of challenges.
Librarian ( although weakened by his ordeal, the mind of this psyker is still formidable)
The dreadnought gains the psychic pilot special rule and is treated as a mastery level 1 psyker. He also gets a psychic hood
Automatically Appended Next Post: PS monsterous creatures have weaknesses.
Can be poisoned.
Are not immune to small arms with some exceptions
Flying monsters have to take grounding tests.
Have to use smash to break vehicles. Dreadnought cc weapons have us striking at s10 without halveing attacks.
Can't be fixed up with techmarines and the like.
Are often over costed. Riptides and wraith knights are 200+ points. 100 pt dread don't seem to bad, though still needs a points cut or extra rules.
Frozen Ocean wrote: As much as I hate it, it's an all-too-common thing in 40k to slap "Monstrous Creature" on something that is neither monstrous nor a creature simply because the rules are good, so it wouldn't be a new thing. Dreadknights and Riptides come to mind.
I hate it because it doesn't make any sense. How come a Riptide can be poisoned and is immune to Haywire, etc? Why does a Riptide's pilot have "more soul" than a Fire Warrior (for things like Spirit Leech)? Of course, this is hardly unique to not-Monstrous-not-Creatures Monstrous Creatures; Necrons, for example, can be poisoned/sickened/feel pain/etc. Still.
Well one unit that should be made a monsterpus creature is a soul grinder, they deserve it much more than a dreadknight or riptide.
Honestly i though it was justified in that the models are actually climbing all over the place punching out lenses and jamming grenades into places that dont belong.
This is what you could do on the first and early second world war tanks, but this glaring design error was quickly fixed after the umpteenth expensive tank was destroyed by an infantry-man with a tank of gasoline.
Maybe you can do this with Imperial tanks, but there aren't all that many places you can do it on xeno tanks (unless they are fairly stupid). It's hard enough actually getting up ontop of a tank and when you are there you run into problems. The only places which aren't hermetically sealed are places with movable parts such as the turret - and good luck sticking something on there. Speaking of the turret, it's moving and a half-experienced crew would be able to sweep climbers off so that it wouldn't be easy. Then you say "hang on, I'll chuck this grenade into the barrel!" to which I say "welcome to co-axially mounted machineguns!".
Actually, I recon that the easiest and safest way to deal with tanks in melee in the 41st millenium would be to stick melta or krak charges on whichever point of hull you get in contact with and hope for the best. I mean, even being able to melee a Blood Angels Rhino, let alone a Dark Eldar Raider, that's travelling at speed is a fairly dumb concept. I can buy that you're able to use a grenade on a stationary vehicle to some effect, maybe even current effect, but once it's moved >6" then you shouldn't be able to melee it at all without special equipment (jump pack).
Non-serious homework: try attaching a frag grenade onto the rear of a truck on the Autobahn. Then imagine doing it to a semi-aircraft hovering 1m above ground level travelling over three times as fast (also, this semi-aircraft is equipped with anti-infantry countermeasures).
Blackskull wrote:Dreadnoughts are veterans of thousands of campaigns, Bjorn was alive at the same time as leman Russ and knew him personally. Walker rules are fine we don't need an enormous fix or rewrite of the entire rule book. Only veteran marines who's lives are worth preserving become a dreadnought yet although the fluff gifts them with eons of experience when it comes to the crunch we have a standard marine statline except with 2 attacks. When I rise to power those of so little imagination will be purged as heretics.
Veteran of countless wars
A dreadnought is a veteran of a thousand battles, only those of great standing are consent to exist as such.
When a dreadnought is bought choose one of the following
Marksman (a true sharpshooter lies within his shots finds all marks)
The dreadnought and all friendly models in 6inches gain prefered enemy.
Champion ( inside the sarcophagus lies the remains of a great warrior)
The dreadnought gains the rampage special rule friendly models in the same combat as the dreadnought gain hatred. Also he is treated as a character for the purposes of challenges.
Librarian ( although weakened by his ordeal, the mind of this psyker is still formidable)
The dreadnought gains the psychic pilot special rule and is treated as a mastery level 1 psyker. He also gets a psychic hood
Automatically Appended Next Post: PS monsterous creatures have weaknesses.
Can be poisoned.
Are not immune to small arms with some exceptions
Flying monsters have to take grounding tests.
Have to use smash to break vehicles. Dreadnought cc weapons have us striking at s10 without halveing attacks.
Can't be fixed up with techmarines and the like.
Are often over costed. Riptides and wraith knights are 200+ points. 100 pt dread don't seem to bad, though still needs a points cut or extra rules.
How a single, brutal table that brings vehicles, monsters, and multi-wound models all in line:
1 - Drive on: No additional effects.
2 - Shaken: The model is reduced to WS:1, BS:1 until the end of its next turn.
3 - Stunned: The model may neither move nor attack until the end of its next turn. Exception: a Zooming Flyer must move exactly 18" in a straight line without turning.
4 - Disarmed: The model loses one weapon, item of wargear, special rule, or attack of the enemy player's choice.
5 - Immobilized. The model may not move for the rest of the game. If already immobilized, the model loses an additional Wound/Hull Point. A Flying Monstrous Creature is grounded. A vehicle Flyer Crashes and Burns. [Note: A little nerf to flyers here -- more than justified!]
6 - Critical: The model loses an additional Wound and rolls on this table again.
Fixing Dreadnoughts
AV 12/12/11, 3 HP WS5/BS4/I4/A3 base
Move Through Cover, Hammer of Wrath D3, Smash
6+ Invulnerable Save
Even in Death I Serve: If a Dreadnought is reduced to 0HP (not as the result of an Explodes! Result), roll a D6. On a 3+ the hit is ignored as the Dreadnought goes into a frenzy. It may act as normal during your next turn. At the end of your next turn, it becomes a Wreck
Anyone think you could do a playtest of these rules? I can't find a game under normal conditions, let alone one with house rules....
Champion ( inside the sarcophagus lies the remains of a great warrior)
The dreadnought gains the rampage special rule friendly models in the same combat as the dreadnought gain hatred. Also he is treated as a character for the purposes of challenges.
No.
Just no.
Speaking as a CSM player, you have no idea how terrible a rule that is.
Simplest and most easy to implement change would be to make it a monstrous creature. Not something I would like to see, but certainly a change that would help them become relevant again.
Ideally in 7th ed riptides, dreadknights & wraithlords would become vehicles, but this will never happen.
A more complicated solution would of course be to actually balance the game , dreadnoughts used to be fine, but the codex creep and rules changes have left many units behind, dreads included. So, bring dreads up to match some things, and other units down.
Soul ginders are a good example of decent walker at the moment. What advantages does it have over a dreadnought?
+1 Armour all around - This is big. AV13 provides so much more protection against the str 6/7 meta spam lists. Also makes it immune to krak grenades if it is not immobilized.
4 attacks - It can actually hurt more than 2 guys in cc.
Good ranged weapon choices - Torrent flamer/ battlecannon + 3 shot skyfire autocannon brings a lot of versatility to a list. The only dread loadout to come close to matching this is the rifleman dread. Even then, the grinder can shoot and still have its Dread cc weapon.
5++ save - Why should a wraithlord have a 3+ save, but a dreadnought has nothing? The Soul grinder at least has something.
Nurgle or slaanesh give fleet or shrouded - customization for specific roles. Want that ginder to be in cc and have reliable charges? Pick slaanesh. Want the grinder to sit back and fire the phlegm cannon whilst have a decent save? Get nurgle to have a nice 2/3+ cover save.
4 hull points. Self explanatory.
A good chance to shrug off half of the damage table
So how much does this cost? Well a SM dread with TL autocannon and fist costs 105 points. A base soul grinder with its 3 shot autocannon and cc weapon costs 135.
30 points for more armour, another hull point, 2 more attacks, 5++ save and skyfire.
Play tested my ruleset with my brother against csm fielding modified hellbrutes.
WS3 BS 3 S6 AV 12 12 10 I4 A2 100pts each
Unit size 1-3
Rage
Crazed (instead rage is now rampage)
IWND Deamon
Deamonforge
Fleet
Essentially they became rather like a carnifex.
I fielded a marksman dread with auto cannons. A champion dread with venerable and assault cannon and powerfist with heavy flamer. And a libby dread with lascannons venerable and stormbolter.
Game went well. Libby got the 4+ invun power from divination and soaked up vast amount s of fire. Lost 2hp when marksman dread had puppet master cast on him and perils wreaked him in the end. Didn't realy inflict much damage.
Marksman dread sat with the devastors and guided lascannon shots well with his 6 inch aura crippled one brute and destroyed another. Was also the only dread to last the whole game.
Champion dread was AWESOME killed a scorerer and terminator squad by chalengeing out each guy. Then getting rampage on the rest. Died after being immobilised by lascannon fire and then torn apart by brutes, took one with him though. Hellbrutes were fielded in 2 squads of 2. One with missile launchers and lascannons. The other 2 went scourges fists and heavy flamers. Fistibrutes killed champion dread and caught a bike squad died to champion dread and marksman dread fire. The missile brutes at the back crippled champion and killed the odd devastator but died to return fire from said devastator squad. Passed IWND too many times though got one down to 1hp early on only to have him go back to 3 later on ( but then be blew up ha ha ha). Overall I lost but enjoyed it. Libby dread was a let down though. Marksman wins MVP
Brutes are mean.
