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.

My gaming group is looking for ideas for a replacement to the Lore of Metal Presence spell from Storm of Magic. We feel a 3+ ward to a target unit on a 10+ is too good, even compared to the other LoM stuff.

We considered giving everyone in the unit a 5+ ward and +1 to their current armor and bestowing a 6+ armor if they dont already have any.

Thoughts?

Thunderfrog wrote:My gaming group is looking for ideas for a replacement to the Lore of Metal Presence spell from Storm of Magic. We feel a 3+ ward to a target unit on a 10+ is too good, even compared to the other LoM stuff.

We considered giving everyone in the unit a 5+ ward and +1 to their current armor and bestowing a 6+ armor if they dont already have any.

Thoughts?

I think it's ok for lore of metal to have a single over-powered spell. It's not like Life and Light don't have that in their basic list.

-Matt

Got to admit that Lore of Metal isn't really a stand-out list compared to Life and such unless you know your opponent is mega armor. But there's some armies (Daemons, Ogres, etc) where Metal is either nearly useless or very poor. It might indeed be GW's idea to try and give the list some goodies.

Both of those thoughts are great, but respectfully, this is in regards to my gaming group, not yours.

Appreciate the opinions, but if you were going to tone it down while keeping it useful, how would you do it?

Increase the roof casting of the spell most probably. 10 to 20 is a huge difference for a spell and can change a strong spell, to a strong but expensive spell. Sincei it's the only spell to have a low cost, raising the cost is the natural responce over making a new one.

Otherwise, these spells are meant to be pretty extreme. Metal got it easy because mental is normally fairly disapointing.

I'd just increase the casting value to at least 20, if not 25. I'd say +25 to cast is a fair value for making one unit unkillable. I've had quite a few games lost because only two dice were needed to make a unit impossible to kill.

I'd even go so far as to increase the casting value of quicksilver swords to 20+ as well. Auto-wounding and ignoring armor is pretty sick for 15+ to cast.

I would start with 20+, raise it slowly and see what happens. Considering metal is a hyper condictional attribute anyways, that has few useful normal spells in compersion to the normal attributes, you got to take that into consideration.

Of course, you already know all that. ^^

Thunderfrog wrote:Both of those thoughts are great, but respectfully, this is in regards to my gaming group, not yours.

If you've already made up your mind, why ask for outsider's opinions? We understand it is for YOUR gaming group. But you posted on a message board and asked for "Thoughts?" on your proposal, which were given. You're free to ignore them, but don't expect everyone to agree with your basic conceit.

GL

DukeRustfield wrote:

Thunderfrog wrote:Both of those thoughts are great, but respectfully, this is in regards to my gaming group, not yours.

If you've already made up your mind, why ask for outsider's opinions? We understand it is for YOUR gaming group. But you posted on a message board and asked for "Thoughts?" on your proposal, which were given. You're free to ignore them, but don't expect everyone to agree with your basic conceit.

GL

You're taking what I typed out of context.


1) Our group decided that we didn't like the spell.
2) We kicked around ideas.
3) We came to Dakka for more ideas on how to fairly change it.
4) Your post, like Matt's, was more along the lines of telling me not to change it because it's fine as opposed to offering any suggestions along the lines I was asking for.

Everyone else besides you ( and another guy, but I respect Hawaiimatts posts quite a bit) has offered either a mechanics change or a casting value adjustment.

As for asking me why I bothered posting in the first place...lets turn the question around.

Why post in my thread about changing the spell if you dont think the spell should be changed?

Thunderfrog wrote:Why post in my thread about changing the spell if you dont think the spell should be changed?

You're basically saying:

"Give me suggestions. But only suggestions that agree with me."

I'm sorry, but you're on a forum that includes debate and people aren't always going to agree with your basic premise. I post because I enjoy debating game theory. If I wholesale agree with someone's point, I generally don't post because I feel they have it covered already.

You will see nearly every thread in every subforum on this entire website people will throw different opinions that are contrary to the original post. Like if someone asks why they should play Ogres you're inevitably going to see some suggestions about other races even though that is not within the confines of the original question. This isn't multiple choice, it's fill in the blank.

You can view it as gross disrespect and people somehow trying to take over your game OR you can view it as people trying to offer suggestions they feel may be appropriate and you might not have otherwise thought of. If you are absolutely sure you thought of every possible avenue and no one can ever offer a suggestion outside that, I'm not sure what to say other than you probably don't need our help.

I still think your missing what I'm saying. I've got over 450 forum posts, so I understand how posting on an open debate forum works. Nor was I assuming any disrespect was intended. Perhaps I should have worded differently.

"Both of those thoughts are great, but respectfully, our group has already decided to change the spell, we just havent figured out how."

What I'm getting at is the idea for this thread was to help me think of changes to the spell.

What you did would be akin to entering a post titled "I hate my red car, help me think of a new color." .. and saying .."I really think you should try red."

Um no, that's not why the thread was started.

Anyways, at this point the thread is likely sufficiently derailed. Thanks to those who contributed.

Thunderfrog wrote:
"Both of those thoughts are great, but respectfully, our group has already decided to change the spell, we just havent figured out how."

I missed that the decision to make changes was already set.
How about unit adds +2 to it's armor save, all attacks against the unit count as being made with hand weapons, attacking units lose Killing blow, Armor Piercing, and poison.
So you'd get a bit more durable, without having a huge ward save.

You could still power through the armor with very high strength attacks, magic weapons that ignore armor, and spells that ignore armor; but against basic attacks, you'd be a lot more durable.

-Matt

Thats a really good suggestion Matt. I'll take that one to the group.