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.

Sorry A 750 per side match.1500 total.
I guess it was a bad metaphor.

Ok so I get now how you eliminate a type of army someone is playing as well as some people depend on these lists. However (I'm using marines as an example) lets say nilla SM head up against BA, we have standard captain or libby choices for HQ and we tailor our troops and elites around that.

Is there a disadvantage for either or advantage? I am not well versed in BA but SM can have a decent balanced army without a SC but still not be overpowering.

Any messing with the rules will make a mess of things IMO. Youmstop SCs and DW player can't play at all. You stop spam, the same happens. Its not like DW is cheesy.

You stop spam yes it stops things like psyrifle spam but stops an ork horde player from playing, which is not cheesy but a view of how orks should be, a massed green tide. Etc etc.

or....you could just learn how to kill certain SC. every character out there has a weak spot. even draigo and other "cheesy ones"

learn what they can do, and how they do it, and think up and devise counters, instead of just relying on internet "wisdom" to win. ive never had an issue taking down draigo, calgar, imotekh, mephiston, saguinor, celestine, ghaz or any others. you just have to know how to take them on, as each will excell in any situation but kind of stink in others.

people who cry cheese, and beg for games limiting certain units (no spam) or no SC, or claim "x" army or "y" build is OP just dont know how to beat that army. for chissakes, every week, heck every day, people come on these forums or the internet in general whining about how they lost a g ame to draigo, or necrons, or DE, or longfangs... so those armies must be OP and omgtheworldisendingbecausepeoplelikeOPcheeseyarmies!!

i mean... do people even READ their codex anymore? or the other codex's when they come out? or do people just hop online, look for netlists and expect them to work without any information or knowlege on HOW the army plays?

my very long and rantable opinion is simply...learn to beat the "op" or TFG units and youll have a much happier time of things, and wont need to beg for help from the "all knowing internet"

sorry.... /end rant.

I play Imperial Guard. I don't really need special characters. Especially for my HQ choices. Almost never use them unless I am playing a themed or fun list. Rest of the army though I tend to run a few special characters. Mostly for fun, but sometimes in tourneys (Marbo, Harker, Alrahem specifically).

Ive never been a fan of SC, I prefer seeing people build their own HQs to give it more personality (im obviously more of a casual).

For this reason, I wish they would bring back the trait system for SM rather than having to take a SC to get unique abilities.

Texanity wrote:Ive never been a fan of SC, I prefer seeing people build their own HQs to give it more personality (im obviously more of a casual).

For this reason, I wish they would bring back the trait system for SM rather than having to take a SC to get unique abilities.

I feel SCs allow the existence of units that you simply wouldn't be able to build 'normally' while cutting off really powerful combinations at the pass. Imagine if you could give Mephiston Shield, or make Mordrak an independent character. No one would ever not take them. But the Armoury style building would mean either you can do this sort of thing, or, you have no really unusual abilities. Special characters allow for the creation of weird things that are limited by uniqueness and lack of options. Ward especially likes to limit certain characters by leaving out that little Independent Character line. Besides, it'd be a nightmare trying to price out things like 'Wolf Guard/one mob of Nobs/Paladins/whatever are Troops.'

I love SCs because they bring theme into my armies. I play goffs so Ghaz leading a horde of orks is pretty awesome. Having Gabriel Seth charge with my Flesh Tearer assault marines is pretty pretty awesome. I use Ghaz because of theme and he's a beatstick. Gabriel Seth on the other hand is not, he has his moments (cutting a land raider in half) but with out him I feel that theres something missing. I use regular characters in my Chaos army though, I just love MoT Sorcerers.

Now we've all gone through the "you can't limit SC's stop it you're wrong blaaargh" maybe we should try and address the main concern here: actually making a non-SC game work.

If it's 750 double-up, then without SC's it's not going to be the end of the world for anyone. I say go for it, try it out. It's just one game after all.

It's been mentioned once or twice, but I think it needs to be reiterated that there is a major difference between "old" special characters (holdovers from 3rd edition like Eldrad, Calgar, or Ahriman) and newer ones like Pedro or the DE Hellion HQ guy.

In 3rd (and probably in 2nd, but that was before my time) almost all of the "special characters" were meant to be once-in-a-while things. They cost a ton of points, and were supposed to be centerpoints of entire battles. They couldn't be fielded under certain points values, so they would almost never be seen. I really do think that these are the characters that are referred to when people talk about problem SC's, even today, because many of them still appear rather unbalancing at first glance due to their many extra abilities.

More recently, though, we've got the "utility" special characters: the ones meant to add flavor to an army or to tweak the rules without becoming the focal point of a battle. These are the characters that unlock different build options, or have a unique piece of wargear, or are intended to simply be a "pre-balanced" unit that the player cannot further adjust to potentially break. While they might even be the reason for an army style's existence (Coteaz, Pedro, half the DE SC's, the Dark Angel guys) they are only really a major impact during army construction; they're not generally going to turn a game on its ear.

In my opinion, the latter ones aren't really "special characters" in the same sense as the old style "Special Characters". The newer ones have names because that's how GW rolls, rather than simply giving a list of complicated options on the unnamed HQ units or having to playtest traits or sub-army lists (the old DW/RW or Craftworld Eldar lists).

The real difference between the two tiers of characters is that the Major SC's feel like unique individuals. There is only one Eldrad; there is only one Abaddon. However, there might be any number of "renowned Autarch" or "Skyboard-riding Dark Eldar pirate who like taking lots of hellion gangs on raids". So, while I've never played a Major SC (never used Eldrad, never even fielded a Phoenix Lord) I've had no compunctions about playing the lesser characters when they unlock certain army construction options (such as Coteaz or Sathonyx). I think keeping those differences in mind are the important part of this discussion.

Well written, Mag.

Frankly I only even own one special character and that's Pedro. I've used a few others (such as Sicarius) simply for fun though.

Ok, so I think that a lot of us here agree that some SCs are there to just change an army build, and some SCs are there to be power houses on their own. So lets get some word on which SCs are on which side of that line. I am the opinion that a SC that modifies the army is fine, but a one man army like mephiston is a bit over done, but I won't ever limit your choices.

So two choices: 1, army modifier; or 2, one man army

Belial: 1, army modifier
Mephiston: 2, one man army
Draigo: 1, army modifier (pallidins as troops, though he is quite strong alone)
Swarmlord: 2, one man army (a hive tyrant with Hive commander upgrade gives almost the same bonuses)
Imotekh: 1 army modifier (his nightfight is essential in my lists as it protects my troops from long range fire, I built my list around him, and he is not good on his own)
Most Necron SCs: 1, army modifier

So help me fill out this list, I'm curious about the space wolves and the blood angels specifically

SW

Beatsticks:
Logan
Ragnar
Canis
Bjorn
Arjac

Army Modifiers
Ulrik (too weak to be beatstick, captain stats with -1W but a few rules to buff units)
Lukas (improves blood claws, glorified wolf guard type deal)
Njal (psyker.. not much of a beatstick so he goes here)


BA

Beatsticks:
Sanguinor
Mephiston

Army Modifiers:
Dante
Seth (no real modifiers.. but he's not incredibly powerful)
Astorath (DC armies)
Tycho (again, not that strong.. glorified captain)

kronk wrote:...when compared to other codecies out there.

I get it. You don't like special characters. It's obvious as the nose on your face.

Can YOU not get that the Space Marine Codex (and a few others) have issues being equal to other codecies without special characters. I'm not talking about wanting to be over-powered. I'm talking about wanting equal footing. Without the SCs, some codecies are at a disadvantage to others.

I'll move along since you're probably just going to keep facepalming.

My comment has nothing to do with special characters and everything to do with the fact that you seem to think that space marines, the best equipped and stated forces in the game, are some how lacking if they don't use special characters to get bonuses. They are the most forgiving and easiest force to use and even compared to those other codecies out there still hold their own quite well. I will agree that some codecies are at a disadvantage, but I just don't consider the Space Marines codex to be one of them. Tau have issues. The older Eldar codex has some issues also. Space marines? Hardly. You allowed to think so, but I am also allowed to not think so...

Skriker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Noir wrote:OP: if you really want to change thing up. Why not some thing like...

NO SPAM TOURNAMENT
All units must be different, excpet troops (you can have 2 of the same troop choose).

That is certainly a different approach, though I'm not sure it really resolves anything per the initial concerns, but it does limit spamming of any particular unit type in a game.

Skriker

I dunno. SCs are a lot of fun, but you should still be able to play and make an army without SCs and without getting butthurt. I don't believe that SCs make an army, even Deathwing. I played a 1750 game and the guy had 5 squads of terminators on the board and a few Landspeeder. So for him Azrael gave him access to two more squads of terminators and they were troops? Doesn't seem like that big of a deal IMO. He would have done just fine with only three squads of terminators.

TL;DR

SCs are fun, but armies can and do still function without them.

Moronic Nonsense wrote:Swarmlord: 2, one man army (a hive tyrant with Hive commander upgrade gives almost the same bonuses)

No it doesn't.
The re-roll outflank edge is hugely important to outflank lists.
He's also the only Nid that can use 2 psychic powers a turn. There's literally no way to duplicate that.
Trying to pretend they're "close enough" is so wrong it hurts. There's a reason for the 95 point difference between a Hive Commander HT (otherwise naked) and The Swarmlord. To me, that outflank re-roll is the majority of those points.