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.

DukeRustfield wrote:I evaluate what people post in the context of the current game. If they want to make a HUGE marathon post and rewrite every Special Character in the game, that's one thing. But saying every other character is wrong and mine is right I don't think is going to work. There's a different cost structure around every type of unit. It actually does make sense--if everyone has to adhere to the same structure.

But the fact you see so few SC's probably says they need a rework in general.

But, at the end of the day, at the points cost you suggested, I wouldn't take this guy. That I'm also not taking any other special characters is neither here nor there.

I mean, it might be balanced in one sense of the term to have everyone's special characters on the sideline because they're all overcosted, but its terrible game design.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DukeRustfield wrote:Like Lizardmen have Scaly Skin and Daemons have wards and Dwarfs have armor. But people tend to cherry pick the best concepts from all books and add them to their guys regardless of whether it makes sense or jives with their general theme. Like if someone came up with a Core Beastman unit that was a BS 5 archer with 36" range multi-shot, flaming KB unit. I'd be like, there's a reason Beastmen aren't uber archers. That unit might work in an elf army, but it doesn't amazingly make sense in Beastmen. Certainly not Core.

Definitely, and I'm pretty sure I've been in other threads agreeing with you on rules proposals that basically sidestep the limitations of certain armies (giving dwarves mobility, or Bretonians high quality infantry)

But granting ward saves to certain special characters doesn't break any overall army limitation. Just about every army can access 6+ ward saves with hand weapon and shield, and ultimately a ward save is the best way to represent a character who's survival depends mostly on their ability to dodge and parry, instead of high toughness or heavy armour.

And the balance across all army books. Again, I compare them to what exists in that book and what exists in all books. If there's only "crap" to compare them with, then think of ways to buff all heroes so they aren't crap. But adding more Teclis units just makes the game more broken one army at a time. (Not that this guy is Teclis, just using that as an example.) Because if there's only crap, then that's all your opponents have to choose from and that's overpowered. Like I think there was a thread (or two) a while ago where we batted around the idea of giving ALL monsters a 5+ armor save if they didn't already have a ward/regen/scaly skin or armor. Just a little something to make monsters less meh.

Or begin to steadily bring the price of characters down, book by book, by pricing them as what they're actually worth.

Agreed, on all counts.

Was someone ever expecting me to chime in?

To be honest, The duellist was simply meant to be a guy who could have an epic fight with a boss, get smushed but still look good doing it [hopefully doing a bit of damage himself.]

The stance I've read [I'm afraid I was skimming, so appologise if I have missed something.] so far is basically that the pistol is a silly idea, because real duelists wouldn't use a pistol in an "in the heat of combat" duel, moreover, it was saved for the gentlemans court.

All well and good, except the gentlemans court is something of the 19th century and earlier. Elves use bows, Lizards walk the earth and huge rats will eat your genitals if they get half the chance.

To that end, I'm assuming 'gentleman's court' doesn't apply here, and this guy is packing to get the job done.

The pistol isn't 'he gets to shoot in combat', it just works like that. Imagine it like a stomp attack that comes first.

It makes sense.
However, the name is also the same as the Champion for the swordsmen. I'd say something like Duelmaster, or something similar, which would make him sounds like he has preactisied for a while.

Also, i'd consider him having a ward save in combat, like an improved parry save, something like a ripose (not sure if it's the right word, but it makes sense in my head.)

If this has already been brought up, then sorry, but it's 1 in the morning here.

Lorna wrote:It makes sense.
However, the name is also the same as the Champion for the swordsmen. I'd say something like Duelmaster, or something similar, which would make him sounds like he has preactisied for a while.

Also, i'd consider him having a ward save in combat, like an improved parry save, something like a ripose (not sure if it's the right word, but it makes sense in my head.)

Riposte is the act of counterattacking after successfully parrying. So in a game a riposte would be getting a bonus attack for every enemy attack that was parried. Which it'd be interesting, but probably a bit fiddly in play, especially when you consider by the rules you parry after you've tested to see if the attack beat your army, so we're already on hazy simulationist ground.

Just best to call it an improved parry.

Something like that. It was late.

I would like to see how it works in a game.

I'll try and get my friend to use it in his army.