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.

 BorderCountess wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:
This is awkward for Harlequins as their epic hero is the Solitaire, and they have so very few units to begin with.

My issue with the 'Epic Hero' keyword is that it doesn't distinguish between 'named characters' and 'specialized operatives'. For example, there's obviously only one Marneus Calgar (which is one too many, in my view), but there are hundreds - if not thousands - of Vindicare Assassins.

It doesn't need to distinguish between them. It's just the current way of denoting that you can only have 1 copy of the model/unit in your list.

 BorderCountess wrote:


My issue with the 'Epic Hero' keyword is that it doesn't distinguish between 'named characters' and 'specialized operatives'. For example, there's obviously only one Marneus Calgar (which is one too many, in my view), but there are hundreds - if not thousands - of Vindicare Assassins.

Harlequins are so very few in number, within a race on the brink of extinction. When Harlequins turns up to save the day for regular Eldar, its like a visit from Tuxedo Mask. But to Harlequins themselves, this is what it's like when a Solitaire pops in for a visit....

One of the biggest issues imo with the current 40k rules is that they apply the rule of 3 to everything except epic heroes.

So your ability to stay special characters is limited only to the number gw has decided to make for your army.

I think space Wolves have the most currently. And Eldar. I love Phoenix lords but you shouldn't see 1 in an army often, let alone 5. The only reason I kind of give them a pass is because he gutted exarchs so there are no generic characters you can take to fill the PL role

Maybe if you could only have 3 total then people wouldn't take so many

But imo special characters should be tied to special scenarios or campaigns and should be used there, not Willy nilly

I've played a few games of AoS recently, and haven't used a named character even once. Now, once my escalation league gets into the higher points I'm going to use one (Ionus Cryptborn), but that's partially because of how badass his model is.

For my Old World army (Tomb Kings), I will rarely use named characters. The only one in my army worth anything is probably Settra, and you kind of have to build around him.

As for 40k, well, yeah I like my named characters. I waited years to finally get The Lion for my Dark Angels army, and dammit I'm gonna run him unless his rules totally suck balls (which they definitely don't).

I don't have a single named character in my Emperors children list, although it does have a winged daemon prince and a Keeper of Secrets. I'd love to run Lucius, but alas, his model is still sold out everywhere.

My last 40K 1500 pt game was Drakhari and the only character model in the whole thing was a lone Succubus.

Completely kicked the Tau players butt too. But I'm finding Lilith to be quite tempting.

I do have a Ulthwe army and always considering Eldrad as the big cheese. I like it being "my own" army, but its a bit challenging to stick with to the limited theme of Seers'n'Guardians, as you run out of options and especially in a larger force.

Eldrad looks like a cool Farseer-Elrond sort of chap, and his model wouldn't look too overwhelming next to other Farseers - just the "THE DAWN WILL TAKE YOU ALL!" pose and nothing else.