Switch Theme:

Rough Riders [Astra Militarum Update]  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




 Kanluwen wrote:
You can regard them as such, but that doesn't make it right. You think it's "odd" that I'm clinging to it so hard while trying to lambast some of my comments as fanon while posting what is supposedly Only War art from a 40k wiki
My guy, I own the book. I have Hammer of the Emperor open on my pdf reader right now. It's the central artwork for the Attilan Rough Riders entry, page 12. If you want to call me a liar, feel free to do so openly, but you'll still be wrong.

 Kanluwen wrote:
and some catalog pages from the late 80s and early 90s...which in and of itself says a lot about the quality of the arguments you've got supporting your stance.
You're referring to the original Rough Riders models? i.e. one of only two "Rough Riders" model sets ever produced outside of Forge World's regiment-specific stuff, just five years before the Attilan Rough Riders dropped in 1994. Your objection here seems to be that you don't like what you see with your eyes. Can't really debate that.

On the other hand, it is really weird to see you dismissing the original Rough Riders concept and lore, which has survived three decades essentially unchanged, repeated or slightly elaborated on down the years. In fact, I actually went and cracked open my 5th edition Imperial Guard codex, which was the last time I remember Rough Riders getting an actual codex appearance. The lore there is almost directly lifted from that original Rough Riders White Dwarf article, including this line: "Rough Riders carry a variety of weapons, but the most deadly is without doubt the explosive-tipped hunting lance derived from the lethal spear heads used by cavalry on their home worlds to hunt down large carnivorous animals. When they confront the enemy, Rough Riders charge into opposing lines with their explosive weapons, changing to lasgun and pistol after the initial onslaught."

You're arguing to ignore not only the first, original appearance of Rough Riders, but also their current, most modern codex appearance. What do you want me to work off, exactly?

 Kanluwen wrote:
Frankly? I'll keep telling you that you don't understand Rough Riders as GW seemed to want them to be given that you're trying to give them lasguns and have generally just made a convoluted mess of a simple "it's a guy with a stick, a pistol, and something else to hit someone with on a horse" unit concept all over the fact that you're trying to fit a unit that traditionally was considered an auxiliary element into the main regiment and as such just generally making a mess of things.
Yup. I'm making such a huge mess of things by adhering to what's actually in the lore and art. I'm making even more of a mess by consolidating largely interchangeable, redundant unit concepts and profiles into three variants of a single, easy-to-parse datasheet. Clutzy of me.

I'm re-reading the 5th edition entry, now, and I'm getting a real sinking feeling in my gut, as I'm forced to wonder if this entire conversation stems from you misunderstanding the phrasing in that book, and how the Imperial Guard's regimental distributions are usually assumed to work (and translate to the tabletop). There is, it's true, a line about how it's "common to divide mounted regiments and allocate Rough Rider squads to fight alongside conventional infantry regiments, where they act as scouts, patrols, and fast response troops". That doesn't mean they're a bunch of feral auxiliaries tossed into random regiments as need arises. It just means that they normally engage in combined arms deployments instead of being fielded en-masse.

Almost the exact same phrasing is found in the Leman Russ Battle Tank section: "Most of the Leman Russ Battle Tanks fighting as part of an infantry company are detached from an 'Emperor's Fist' or 'Emperor's Lance' armoured regiment. It is rare indeed for an Imperial Guard force to engage the enemy without at least one of these fearsome machines in support." These still form part of the "regiment" for tabletop purposes, are very often drawn from the same homeworld (for obvious reasons), and will usually be seconded for at least a campaign. That doesn't mean the Leman Russ Tanks are auxiliaries. That's how Rough Riders work.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/08 23:09:24


 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




The lore might suggest mounted regiments, but I think maybe they are speaking of regiments in the sense of guard being deployed in the 100,000's and one of the regiments being mounted, but also I just think it would be funny to the enemy commander facing off against a force on horse back, I imagine it would sound something like.. "uh sir its a bunch of dudes on horse back, and the enemy commander against the horse back regiment would basically say "blessed be the emperor for this bounty" and then open up a shooting gallery."
   
Made in de
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot






I doubt that anyone of us really knows "how GW intends rough riders to be" most likely they have forgotten about them. But as I said, who knows, except maybe people who work there and have extensivly flaked with their colleagues about it.

On the general note: I think regimental rough riders make as much if not more sense then auxiliary rough riders. I wouldn't mind the latter being an option, but the regiment should be possible. Beside the evidence already mentioned my main argument towards Kanluwens "Rough Riders almost exclusivly a feral worlders" would be that de currently have the rules to build feral/feudal regiments (just take infantry and give them wilderness survivors and another fitting trait like lords approval). So if I do this and build such a regiment, why so my riders still have to be auxiliaries?

But we should not get stuck in this fruitless discussion. Ww have another thread for Kanluwens ideas, so hab think about the OP here.

As asked in my last post: what are your thoughts about an alternative armament option consisting of two Hot shot laspistols?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/09 05:08:06


~5100 build and painted 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




 Pyroalchi wrote:
As asked in my last post: what are your thoughts about an alternative armament option consisting of two Hot shot laspistols?
I think that'd be a really cool visual, great for anyone who wanted their own "cowboys". The only reason I'm avoiding it is because hot-shot weapons are a very distinctly Tempestus thing, so giving them to Rough Riders feels a bit odd; I think Creed is the only non-Tempestus unit to have one. Otherwise I'd probably have just swapped out dragoon lasguns for hot-shot lasguns right at the start, and assumed the Rough Riders mounted the power packs on their steeds.
   
Made in de
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot






Ah, I see. You are right that hot shots are more a Scion thing, I just find it a pitty that the Hot shot laspistol has such a poor standing. The few that can take them usually take something better (plasmapistols).

Anyway, it will be a fun modelling project.

~5100 build and painted 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Okay, but space cowboys sound awesome though. How about scion space cowboys equipped with hotshot and bolt pistols, riding their rune-warded steeds into the fray from unexpected angles. Give them bolt pistol strats that let them use blessed or poisoned ammo to counter daemonic and xenos threats. Give them a hotshot strat that lets them increase their number of shots as they blow through their power supply. (There's a spare pistol in the saddle holster.)

And then give their sergeants a power fist option so I can field Sparks Nevada in my army!
   
Made in de
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot






Wyldhunt: thanks for that! I know what I have to do now!

I already have some Puppetswar bikers I wanted to add to my Scions, but Pistolero Gunslingers sound to cool to leave them out

~5100 build and painted 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




T/Wells

RevlidRas wrote:
Rough Riders (Fast Attack, Power Rating 4)
Rough Rider: M 10", WS 4+, BS 4+, S3, T4, W2, A1, Ld 6, Sv 5+
Rider Sergeant: M 10", WS 4+, BS 4+, S3, T4, W2, A2, Ld 7, Sv 5+

This unit contains 1 Rider Sergeant and 3 Rough Riders. It can contain up to 4 additional Rough Riders (Power Rating +4) or up to 8 additional Rough Riders (Power Rating +8). Each model is armed with: laspistol; hunting lance; frag grenades; krak grenades. In addition, the entire unit must be armed with either roaring wheels, stomping feet, or trampling hooves. If the unit is armed with stomping feet, double its Power Rating.


Hey ombre, why wouldn't you tailor down the FW rules for Krieg death riders and use them then alter some of their rules, for instance the augmented mount rule may not apply to another faction such as cadians so you can choose something else. I mean it might be easier than trying to make a whole different set of rules.

Also further up the post you talked about 15points models aren't worth having if they can only have lasguns, death riders are 15pts and they can only take las pistols and sarg can take a plasma pistol. You are trying to get all the positives with out any negatives imo, you should consider using death riders at a base and build off that.
   
Made in de
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot






While I second the sentiment that it is good to start of existing similar datasheets, the issue was about 15 points riders with lasguns INSTEAD of hunting lances while deathriders have laspistols AND hunting lances.

Edit: also just realized he oriented himself at an existing datasheet: the legends Rough Rider we lost only recently.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/10 19:33:09


~5100 build and painted 
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Almightyliham wrote:
Hey ombre, why wouldn't you tailor down the FW rules for Krieg death riders and use them then alter some of their rules, for instance the augmented mount rule may not apply to another faction such as cadians so you can choose something else. I mean it might be easier than trying to make a whole different set of rules.
These are a melange of the three different Rough Rider profiles we currently have (Attilan-ish, Krieg, and Mukaali) smoothed out into a single profile to represent "human riding a horse/lizard/robo-wolf/kangaroo/bike". The "Mukaali" are a bit faster but slightly less stompy, the Death Riders are less insanely tough, and the Attilan-ish guys are a bit tougher, but overall I think it's an effective compromise.

Almightyliham wrote:
Also further up the post you talked about 15points models aren't worth having if they can only have lasguns, death riders are 15pts and they can only take las pistols and sarg can take a plasma pistol. You are trying to get all the positives with out any negatives imo, you should consider using death riders at a base and build off that.
Death Riders are 15 points with laspistols... and a hunting lance, and AP-1 on their horse's attacks, and 3 Wounds, and a 4+ Save, and 5+ Feel No Pain. Those are kind of important differences, y'know?

The Dragoon Lasgun works the way it does because it replaces the hunting lance, pushing that unit of Rough Riders into a pure "ranged harassment" role. If the firepower they can put out is 2 lasgun shots per horsie... they're kind of useless at that. So instead they get a slight discount and a shotgun-style buff on the lasgun, to encourage riding up close and hopefully causing some problems.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/04/10 20:46:26


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Kanluwen wrote:
And you started by saying that there were biker Rough Riders, floated some nebulous conversions in the books and I flatout said where I started getting into this game(Doctrines circa 2003) and the books I had for Guard. Nowhere did they have Lasguns or Bikers.

It would be unfortunate if the very book you reference had rules for Rough Riders with lasguns.

'Any number of models without hunting lances may substitute a lasgun or shotgun for their laspistol at no extra cost.'
Codex: Imperial Guard (3.5 ed. (the one with Doctrines)), pg.46

Very unfortunate indeed.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/04/10 21:57:24


 
   
Made in au
Regular Dakkanaut




Personally, I think you should split these into 3 datasheets. 1 Troops option and 2 Fast Attack options.

Troops would be Dragoons.
They're mounted infantry. They're nothing too special with a 10 inch move, T4, W2, and armed with lasguns. With the option of 1 special weapon per 5 models. Trained to fire from horseback. Probably around 8 points per model. Maybe they can swap their lasguns for shotguns, or laspistols and chainswords for free.

***

Fast Attack would be Rough Riders and Bikers.

Rough Riders would basically have the same stat-line as Death Riders, except with WS3+ and no 5+++. You could maybe go crazy with them and give them lasguns, laspistols, hunting lances, and chainswords. All their equipment would be holstered around their saddle, they'd fire off a few volleys with their lasguns, put them away then brace for a charge with their lances. Once in combat they could swap to their pistols and chainswords. They're basically the closest thing Guard could get to shock cavalry.

Bikers I'd have similar stats to an Atalan Wolfquad, except as a motorbike with a sidecar. Have sidecars with heavy stubbers, grenade launchers or melta guns. The driver having only a laspistol. With the driver maybe able to take a demo charge as an upgrade.
   
Made in gb
Regular Dakkanaut




Jarms48 wrote:
Personally, I think you should split these into 3 datasheets. 1 Troops option and 2 Fast Attack options.
I can see the argument for splitting bikes and Rough Riders; they're definitely the most distinct of the three concepts, especially with the keyword-swap, and could be represented by mods to the Atalan kit. The main reason to keep them united is the sheer redundancy of having near-identical armaments and profiles, and they could be made more different in the way you describe, with sidecars/buggies as "Heavy Weapons Teams".

Then again, there's technically nothing stopping that from going on steed-based Rough Riders, too; a lascannon or heavy bolter zamburak atop a riding lizard or cyberhorse would be really cool.

I can't fully agree with the argument for splitting off lasgun-armed and lance-armed Rough Riders into different units, however, much less into Troops/Fast Attack. The main reason to do so would be to make the former cheaper and weaker, and the latter more dangerous and expensive, but there's a limit to how dangerous you can make Rough Riders before they become too expensive for their fragility - at which point you have to make them even tougher and more expensive to compensate, at the end of which you end up with Death Riders, who are tougher than Ogryn or even the AdMech's cyber-cavalry. It starts looking a little silly, y'know?

Splitting the profiles makes a lot of sense, you're not wrong, but there's part of me that wants to just split them into Ranged Biker/Cavalry (with mounted Heavy Weapons) and Melee Biker/Cavalry (with an extra pip of WS) and be done with it. Hm.

Shotguns definitely make sense as an option, and could replace dragoon lasguns entirely, given the concept of those guns... though they feel just a little weak.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: