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.

Simple enough question--what are pros/cons to griffons? Griffons are 200pts, Sun Dragons are 30pts more. Dragons have 1 higher toughness and 1 more wound (plus scaly skin of 5+), and lower initiative. Looking at it, I think the extra 30pts is well worth a more durable monster, but I could be wrong--thoughts?

All are true points, but that dragon costs a hero choice as well.

Gobstomp420 wrote:All are true points, but that dragon costs a hero choice as well.

ZING!

The loss of a hero slot is important to some, but if you are going the traditional Prince on star dragon you would be hard pressed to fit in 3 more characters even if you were allowed, until you get over 2500 points.

Not to mention that the griffon's base is half the size of the new dragon's. This makes it easier to avoid flank charges once your stuck in and easier to fit into tight spaces between the enemies units.

gardeth wrote:Not to mention that the griffon's base is half the size of the new dragon's. This makes it easier to avoid flank charges once your stuck in and easier to fit into tight spaces between the enemies units.

heh--or just model the new dragon onto an old base.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gobstomp420 wrote:All are true points, but that dragon costs a hero choice as well.

Yeah, I'd forgotten about that. That changes things considerably.

Unless you're taking Eltherion, I would steer away from the griffon. The Griff just can't take the abuse and is only useful in combat where as the dragon can be hopping around and using it's breath weapon.

You flat out can't compare creatures from one army list to another. The design for the monsters is based on the race using them, and the character riding them, and trying to argue that because the Dragon is only 30 points more expensive and he has all these super awesome stats and abilities that somehow the Gryphon is not viable, is slowed.

The Gryphon fills a viable niche in empire armies that don't have an option at a non-special-character-ridden dragon.

well, perhaps I should have clarified that I play High Elves (though most of the responses here seemed to assume that anyway). That said, I think from what the responses here indicate, Griffons are viable for Elves in games below 2000pts--the 30pt difference is irrelevant, because of the extra hero slot a dragon takes up. So, at 2Kpts, a Griffon provides that extra combat punch for a general without interfering with the ability to take a few mages as well.

Might be a comp consideration. If you go to tourneys you could try and get a bonus for not being another star dragon guy. Also, they aren't a large target? (right?)

Yep they are large targets. But Whitestagg does bring up a good point bout the now almost auto-include of a dragon in Helf lists...
I would have to do a lot of blinking if I actually saw a griffon across the table. Still big, still annoying and fast, still Terror causing but finally....
Not another bleeping dragon list

Ah, that is too bad (well, not bad, terror is good) But yeah, spice things up a bit then. Also, an opponent might not think as much of a griffon so perhaps only 80% of his shooting would be aimed at it rather than 100% in the case of the dragon)