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.

I myself am personally a huge fan of all the flavor additions to rules like the warlord traits and characters issuing duels, but there is one thing that does bother me about the warlord traits...you have to roll for them every single time...which sorta detracts from the fluffiness of it when in one battle your dude can be all "blood for the blood god" and the next he can be sitting back in his command chair and intercepting enemy reserves.....

My friend and I have a house rule that we get to pick our warlord trait BUT we pick it for the army list and not every battle, so that our fluffiness is consistent...what do all of you think?

Are there any other house rules for warlords that you add to your games?

But not all warlord traits are created equal. If you didn't have to roll for them, then everybody would just pick the best ones every time. In that case, why bother having a trait table? Why not just change the rules of the game itself?

What I personally find interesting about warlord traits is that they are only infrequently useful. In a way, it's sort of like seizing the initiative - you don't count on it happening often, but it happens just frequently enough and is just useful enough when it happens to actually have a small impact and warrant consideration.

Adds a little of the unknown into the mix, some can be good some can be bad depending on the army you are running, i quite like them as they are

They're good for pointing and laughing at your opponent when he rolls a bad 'un.

And using them as a crutch to excuse your own poor performance when you get stomped.

Its rare i roll anything useful most of the time i'd prefer to not even bother.

My favorite house rule is where you roll one die and then choose that result from any of the tables. So I roll a 3, I can pick a 3 from column A, column B, or column C. Still somewhat random, but you are less likely to get saddled with something totally useless.

We use that one at my local store. Works out pretty well.

 Brother SRM wrote:
My favorite house rule is where you roll one die and then choose that result from any of the tables. So I roll a 3, I can pick a 3 from column A, column B, or column C. Still somewhat random, but you are less likely to get saddled with something totally useless.

We do this at our flgs now. Because there is nothing like rolling the trait that lets you re roll outflank when you don't have a single unit capable of outflanking haha. And having your opponent roll something awesome like -1 to your opponents reserves ;p

As a deamon player I hope you don't mind me having +1 to my reserve rolls every single game.

 Ailaros wrote:
But not all warlord traits are created equal. If you didn't have to roll for them, then everybody would just pick the best ones every time. In that case, why bother having a trait table? Why not just change the rules of the game itself?

But if you get to choose which units/armies you bring to battle, then everyone would just pick the best ones every time. Why bother having a codex?
He did change the rules of the game itself. Why you care so much about someone else's house rules?


I really like Brother SRM's house rule. Sounds cool.

 Brother SRM wrote:
My favorite house rule is where you roll one die and then choose that result from any of the tables. So I roll a 3, I can pick a 3 from column A, column B, or column C. Still somewhat random, but you are less likely to get saddled with something totally useless.

I've not played much 6th ed but when i have I've always rolled one which says "When within x"" of an objective" When there are none

But I still like them

I was indifferent to Warlord traits, until I rolled the one that gave your army furious charge in the enemy's deployment zone... when I was playing orks.

I hate them now. I really, REALLY, hate them. I never get anything good. It just makes no sense. Why would my "experienced" Imperial Guard commander decide "Hey, today I'm going to brush up on urban warfare" When we're on a grasslands board. Or why would he bother with learning how to outflank, when NOTHING IN HIS ARMY CAN OUTFLANK. It really feels like randomness just for the sheer hell of it.

Most people at our store will avoid them if possible. If we do have to use them,some people who just roll a d3 to pick a table, then a d6 and take whatever the result is, as they really don't care. Even the people who just play for fun hate them, and that's saying something. I'm not a WAAC player, but I enjoy having "competitive" matches as well, but when literally everyone from the guy who brings 30 flashgitz to the guy who goes to NOVA every year hates something, it's probably a bad addition to the rules.

 Testify wrote:
As a deamon player I hope you don't mind me having +1 to my reserve rolls every single game.

But you already did, it's called 6th edition!

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

It just makes no sense. Why would my "experienced" Imperial Guard commander decide "Hey, today I'm going to brush up on urban warfare" When we're on a grasslands board. Or why would he bother with learning how to outflank, when NOTHING IN HIS ARMY CAN OUTFLANK. It really feels like randomness just for the sheer hell of it.

Just to be clear, that behavior actually fits the fluff for IG, either because of problems with the commander or with Imperial Bureaucracy. Sometimes the commander brushes up on urban warfare because he was told his regiment was going to be fighting on a Hive World by some bureaucrat, but when he gets there it turns out that the pencil-pusher was an idiot and didn't notice that the planet was clearly classified as an Agri-World.

But yeah, while I like Warlord Traits, I feel that they are poorly implemented. Maybe a better way of doing it would be to have it so that you can buy Warlord traits for your commander, or make the warlord trait system somewhat similar to the psychic power system (which works significantly better, even though it is still random). Perhaps give each HQ option a command level of X, which lets it roll X times on the warlord traits table Y or Z, and they can either choose one command trait that they roll, or the 'Primaris Trait' for the table they rolled in.

Sometimes your commander is one who happens to be great at fighting in cities, but unfortunately you're not in the city during the fight. You fight with the army you've got, not necessarily the army you want. I do wish more of the traits were useful in a general sense (no pun intended), but I've found the method I mentioned earlier to mitigate that a lot.

There was also that idea I've read before 6th ed was officially launched, to run it like in Deathwatch(RPG)'s armor history table, you roll and get to pick the +/- 1 result, so a roll of 3 can get you 2, 3 and 4 to choose from.

 Brother SRM wrote:
Sometimes your commander is one who happens to be great at fighting in cities, but unfortunately you're not in the city during the fight. You fight with the army you've got, not necessarily the army you want. I do wish more of the traits were useful in a general sense (no pun intended), but I've found the method I mentioned earlier to mitigate that a lot.

It might make sense fluff-wise, but it's absolutely stupid for game balance. For example, I get the trait that gives me VPs for each of your sergeants my HQ kills in challenges, while you get +1 cover in ruins when we don't have any ruins on the table. This probably won't guarantee my victory, but if we're already evenly matched (or worse, I'm favored to win) it could make a big difference in the final outcome. And it sucks because it's completely random. I didn't gain that advantage because I brought a better list/strategy, or because I'm the more skilled player, I got it because I happened to roll better on a completely random table.

And of course it's pointless anyway, since there's already a method for giving advantages to an army: the HQ slot. If you want to give out bonuses, put them on the various HQ choices.

I just wonder why they don't have army specific traits. Have the three tables in the BRB and each codex gets its own table. Makes things more fluffy and well balanced if you ask me.

Personally, I feel liker Niner009.

trait [treyt; Brit. also trey] noun
1. a distinguishing characteristic or quality, especially of one's personal nature

How can it be a "trait" if it is randomly generated again and again? It sounds cool, but it's misleading. Fluffwise, "Warlord Traits" would work if you'd use a different warlord every single time, but not if you actually plan on using a single unique commander for all your battles.
I dunno, perhaps whoever came up with the idea thinks the players won't actually bother thinking about the fluff behind their army and its characters.

On the other hand, I also have to agree with Ailaros' argument that the traits are not equal, even though I'm tempted to add "so what?", given that nobody is actually at a disadvantage.

Perhaps I just think this could have been done more elegantly. Either offer a table of equally useful traits for players to pick from to further customise their army, or make a table with randomly generated minor advantages which are less pseudo-dependent on the commander but more on something that happened to the army shortly before the battle. Maybe they were roused by a particularly inspiring speech, maybe they saw an omen, maybe they are particularly well-rested and eager for battle, ...
If anyone remembers the SoB Sacred Rites, that makes a whole lot more sense rather than attributing completely random benefits to a particular persona each time he or she appears.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I just wonder why they don't have army specific traits. Have the three tables in the BRB and each codex gets its own table. Makes things more fluffy and well balanced if you ask me.

They will get them with their new codices from here on out, or so the rumor goes. I guess we'll know when Chaos drops in a couple weeks.

 Brother SRM wrote:
My favorite house rule is where you roll one die and then choose that result from any of the tables. So I roll a 3, I can pick a 3 from column A, column B, or column C. Still somewhat random, but you are less likely to get saddled with something totally useless.

This is exactly what my friends and I are doing. Even then they turn out to be pointless or forgotten most of the time.

They seem rather stupid... Its also very frustrating that im required to field a 100+ pt hq choice that cannot be a warlord, requiring me to take a second hq the cheapest of which runs just under 70 points and really is just isnt very good... I love my army, i love my army, i love my army...

 DeffDred wrote:

 Brother SRM wrote:
My favorite house rule is where you roll one die and then choose that result from any of the tables. So I roll a 3, I can pick a 3 from column A, column B, or column C. Still somewhat random, but you are less likely to get saddled with something totally useless.

This is exactly what my friends and I are doing. Even then they turn out to be pointless or forgotten most of the time.

I usually find that they're useful; sometimes very much so. Some of them you have to make an effort to use (like making a point of moving a unit or or aiming at units within 3" of an objective).

I am really curious to see if they have more in the new codices, and if any such charts are better written to avoid the "useless trait" syndrome.

AndrewChristlieb wrote:
They seem rather stupid... Its also very frustrating that im required to field a 100+ pt hq choice that cannot be a warlord, requiring me to take a second hq the cheapest of which runs just under 70 points and really is just isnt very good... I love my army, i love my army, i love my army...

Uh... what? Why do you need to take two HQ choices? Unless you're playing 2000+ point games with multiple FoCs, you only need one for your core army. Unless whatever army you play has some silly rule I've never heard of that is.

 Brother SRM wrote:

AndrewChristlieb wrote:
They seem rather stupid... Its also very frustrating that im required to field a 100+ pt hq choice that cannot be a warlord, requiring me to take a second hq the cheapest of which runs just under 70 points and really is just isnt very good... I love my army, i love my army, i love my army...

Uh... what? Why do you need to take two HQ choices? Unless you're playing 2000+ point games with multiple FoCs, you only need one for your core army. Unless whatever army you play has some silly rule I've never heard of that is.

I think he means Black Templars, whom have to take the Emperor's champion over 750 points yet he doesn't count as a warlord.

Ah, alright. It doesn't say anywhere in his post what army he plays, but I forgot that the Champion can't be the compulsory HQ.

I have gotten warlod traits useful very few times. I mostly get the -1 to reserve rolls, which SUCKS.
Although when i get the auto-night fight for my tau, its a god send.

As a daemon player only a few are useful.
The +1 reserve rolls is the only one thats always useful. The rest rely on positioning which often just doesn't happen, or other impossibilities (like your warlord hanging out in your deployment zone, or being able to shoot)

When my friends and I play, we nearly always forget our Warlord traits. But I do like that idea of rolling and then choosing the table, maybe we'll try that.

 Brother SRM wrote:
Ah, alright. It doesn't say anywhere in his post what army he plays, but I forgot that the Champion can't be the compulsory HQ.

Ya sorry, BT. They havent said that the EC doesnt still count as your compulsory HQ (he did in 5th) but it really doesnt matter since he still cant be the warlord :/. On the plus side tho my JP chappy+assault squad have been doing much better, even with overwatch . Takin the good with the bad...