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.

Is it just me or have you noticed players who couldn't grasp tactics in 4th can now be competetive with the advent of Character hammer. Just like the title says it has become such a crutch for incompetence that I absolutley hate taking characters these days. I am getting to the point that I refuse to play carbon copy Vulcan, Fateweaver, Shrike, ect lists anymore. Much rather have a level playing field against another vet player and actually let it boil down to the better tactician. I mean if I ever do play in a tournament my conversation will go something like this "so what crutch are you taking today". To bad GW went back to character hammer to keep up with War Machine and Hordes it was much better as a mass combat system were characters did not have such a signifigant effect on the game. Just my humble opinion and new catch phrase "Crutch Hammer"

If you think an experienced player won't bring Shrike or Vulcan I think your sorely mistaken.

Also, I'm sure if you keep up calling it Crutch Hammer some 12 year old will feel bad enough to cripple is army by removing Shrike. Good luck!

Were did I say an experienced player wouldn't take a special character. My point being some are only even competetive because they take characters. I played Daemon Crusher early in 5th and it was so silly that I immediatley sold it. (This was just prior to last years Ardboyz and guess what it won Ardboyz). I even took this early version that was unrefined and tried it out against Stelek and St. John. Now you have to take characters to trump other characters and list compesition itself has devolved into what to take to maximize your characters buffs.

Lol
"My army was winning so I felt Bad Playing it."

Utter rubbish. If you want Characterhammer play 2nd ed. 5th edition is no more Characterhammer than 4th, and 4th had Elrad...

I played RT,2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th. You do have a point though that it is not quite character hammer. It's more like Warmachine hammer right now. I am guessing from your strong although confusing response that 5th has helped you. (Age 7 and what not) If you have a point please express it beyond dis is rubbish.

Well, you are the one who is confusing really. You are saying that "If I take Vulkan I am no longer a Crap Player".

That is beyond ridiculous.

A Poor Player with Vulkan will lose just as fast as one without against a Good Player.

Methinks the OP is a troll. Or a very sore loser.

I don't bother to use characters. I like to customise the wargear too much. But I have no problem when people do. I certainly play plenty of good veterans who take a character...and I certainly win more than I loose (except against one guy, who is the Favoured of the Dice Gods) so I don't see the problem.

Sure, some of the effects are nasty. Vulkan is especially unpleasant when you run into two squads or ten Terminators with Thunderhammers and Lightning Shields. But the handicap is this...you have to take the character. I can build a nastier killing machine, cheaper, most of the time.

Are there broken characters? Of course there are. Welcome to Warhammer. You don't need a character for the ever popular 'Minimal Scout/Land Raider trio' in 1500 points games, or an Ork Biker Nob Sqaud. Hell, I can't think of any of the really broken army lists, the kind you see at Tournaments, bar maybe Pedro Cantor and the Drop Podding Sternguard of Doom.