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.

Wow, you have been one busy man!

I have just started a wood elf army myself, so I can offer enthusiastic criticism, but I don't know them well enough for constructive criticism!

I love the idea of allowing more units to hit-and-run, but reading your 'asrai warfare' rule it seems a little unfair that when an opponent beats a wood elf unit in combat they can't pursue them, I would suggest when the wood elf loses it DOES take a break test and if it PASSES its allowed to fall back with the rules above.

Do asrai bows need to be strength 4 AND armour piercing? And if glade guard can hit and run and have just had a bow upgrade would that not justify a basic points increase? skirmish upgrade = very cool.

But enough criticism, I am loving having a dragon as a rare choice, allowing mages to use more lores, bolt thrower-esque warhawk attacks (inspired idea!) and the new athel loren lore in general (tree singing as lore attribute & 'summon' dryads = awesome).

Last suggestion, I always thought it interesting that as forest spirits were immune to psychology they couldn't flee as a reaction, this made them tactically different to other units and also fluffy as they are a force of nature and thus have no concept of retreat, I think you should keep that.

Anyway, i'll shut up now and let someone who really knows about asrai say something, I'm moving over to the dwarf thread I just saw as it's making my beard tingle!

Fair points all round. When I look at the hit and running I see a new option that allows woodies to actually throw units into combat again (now that they can't kill off the front rank to be safe), I can imagine how you'd run out of space though, and have a complete mess of skirmishing units fleeing and charging in all directions if you weren't careful! funny for your opponent, a real test of organization for you

Hi, Liking all the updates so far! Here's a couple more thoughts.

I have a couple of suggestions for LoAL. Firstly does the signiature spell have a range? I think it should have some maximum range, increased with the bigger version. Maybe also have it able to target units outside range but within 6" of a forest as well if you really want it to get to far away units.

With the Faerie Fire spell I like the spell but I think being able to move enemy units like that is a big deal, between reforming, moving back to where they want to be and possibly failing their stupidity test that is 2/3 turns out of the game. I think it needs to be a higher casting or have some caveat on how it can move enemy units.

I really like the new 6 spell btw.

Also the war hawk attack has the potential to hit a LOT of units with a 20" march and fast cav shenanigans. would you consider changing it to pick one unit you have moved over but make the attack penetrate ranks, more along the lines of terradons? I think either way they also justify costing 5 more points considering the increasing damage larger units can deal with a rake rule. 6 of them moving over 20" worth of units and doing 6 str4 hits to each one (including war machines, lone characters, small/skirmishing units), multiple times a game, is worth more than 180 pts. I think 35 for a more focused rake attack would make more sense.

Also I really like the current set-up on eternal guard, I think the points cost is pretty spot on for what they do. I'm sure I saw you say in a post here somewhere that eternal guard also had parry but I can't see it in the army list.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
And what lores can singers use?

Ah, i hadn't thought of wind blast, fair point on that.

Loren, beasts and life is a good shout for singers, I wouldn't object to them having shadow too.

Definitely keep war hawks at 2 wounds, that on its own makes them useful, and 1 unit/turn rake and still shoot is good. I haven't played much vamps (in 8th) or demons so I don't know about the hexwraith/screamer comparison, I have however been thoroughly annoyed by terradons plenty of times.

Eternal guard don't need parry, you're going for attacks and that's fine, especially with more access to life magic, I don't think spear-stave has to do more than it does in the current book, the extra attack on the profile and the greater buff/hex magic options the army would have in general are enough to make them useful, and i think 14pts is good. Also missed that three supporting attacks thing, i think that (the 30 man, 90 attack scenario) is too much, especially with the poison option. I think with a 3 attack front rank and spears you are pretty well covered attacks wise with just 1 supporting (40 man horde getting 60 attacks if you don't charge and 30 getting 50).

And yes giving them poison is still a very good shout! I don't think its too much though.

BTW have you managed to get many test games in? and what faired well/poorly? I'd love to see a bat-rep with you using this codex

Could you maybe give the eternal guard themselves the armour piercing rule (better fluff if it's the guards' skill rather than their weapons) in return for less attacks if you want them to be more versatile? Or give them a fighting style option between an attacking option and defensive option?

I also think it would be cool if they had ASF, just to throw that out there

I like the 5+ regen idea for eternal guard, however if you do that AND make them str 4 aren't you just making dryads but with -1T and +1A (spear staves)?

Think about them in comparison with the 2 other combat infantry units: wardancers and dryads. Buffed dryads or wardancers should be the go to units for beating tough enemies, in flanks and combined charges. Treekin can take on tough enemy units face to face and win, especially with a little buffing.

Although eternal guard are cool they serve a the army list better by being an anvil, and as long a they are stubborn they are a decent bodyguard unit. With above average attacks and WS and regen/parry they should chew through enemy core infantry anyway. I would like them to be kick ass elite infantry but realistically that's not what the army list needs them to be.

I also think they need the highborn/core rule back, I can't see many people sinking special points into them when they are already taking fighty dryads as core and the special choice alternative is treekin, wild riders etc. I think players should get some reward/army variation if they take a highborn who ISN'T going to be avoiding combats!

I think -1 to hit fits better,

If you like the highborn/core rule then make it that only a unit joined by the highborn is stubborn.

Thinking about a highborn and guard theme option for an army perhaps eternal kindred could cover some of this? Along the lines of "...If the army general has eternal kindred then units of eternal guard become a core choice. Any unit of eternal guard joined by the character gains stubborn" (and keeps the rule if he is slain in combat while part of the unit?) That's pretty close to the current army book rules, but a little more condensed.

This could be an excuse to drop a point or two from them but this way they are better value for points. Add a few points to eternal kindred in return if you think. Could open up more uses for them while still having the specialized option.

I would love to see more theme-able army lists like this in general (I think it would be particularly good with wood elves),GW seem to have a go at it every now and again, but they always get rid of it in the very next codex/book.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just for fun:

Wardancer Highborn:
Gives any unit he joins / units of wardancers within 8(?) the hit and run special rule

Or
Wardancers in an army led by this character gain +1 to their talismanic tattoo save

And/Or even...
Units of wardancer count as core choices but you must have one non-wardancer core choice for each wardancer unit taken as core (or core and special? eg 2 wardancers and 2 glade guard as core then 2 more wardancers as special?)


Branchwraiths:
Make spites for treekin and dryad champions unlocked by having a branchwraith

Perhaps with all kindreds make it so that they make a unit of type that they join stubborn? Could stop units like wardancers/cavalry from whiffing and losing to static combat res

Ok I'll stop now

(Treeman ancient = core treekin)

It would be a shame to lose a cool and characterful rule from the real book so I'd say keep the eternal/core rule in some form, I think making it a kindred rule would be simpler and more characterful.

@Bastion: You're obviously experienced with the guard and your 15pt elf special idea makes sense, so what would you want from them for 15pts? would a 5+ regen make up the difference?

And I think that first 4 in the wild riders' stat line is their BS.

Banners are a tough one to get right, let's face it half of the banners in the 7thed books are barely ever used, they are the one magic section I haven't minded getting pruned back in the 8thed books in favour of common ones. At leat the two you have here Warp are genuinely useful and not over-costed!

The current core eternal guard rule states "If the army is led by a highborn, then Eternal Guard are a core unit. Eternal Guard are a Special Unit if your army is led by any other kind of character" and then their Bodyguard special rule states that any unit joined by a highborn or noble is stubborn.

I like your current spell list. I think turning a non-forest terrain feature into a forest would get a bit complicated, as would the two-units-in-one-forest idea. Springing up a new temporary forest however could be good, would it last a turn or could it work as RIP? Like I said though I like all the current spells so I'm not sure what you'd get rid of.

if you want to make the #6 a vortex then go for it. Its only random in subsequent turns and also an elf cannot really tell the spirits of the forest what to do, only ask nicely!

I really like the forest dragon, having a dragon as a rare choice is just too cool, and I like the stats/ward save trade off. I'm interested in how you came to 250pts, is that reflecting what you think dragons in general are worth, or the forest dragon specifically?

Dryads never needed changing, is the only difference for dryads in your rules the fear causing and full ward save from forest spirits? Just to check it is a full ward right? Did you think they needed that buff to make them worth 12pts?

I like the ancients a lot too, but I think the wizard level costs are too high, I think somewhere between 30-40 for lvl 1 and 40-60 for lvl 2 would be better. Partly because it would be hard to also fit a lord level wizard into an army, or do you think a an ancient led army should have to rely on multiple low level wizards?

I'm presuming the benefits of the two level building effect on the forest spell would be that 20 men can shoot? It's an intereting idea. How about say you can choose to either create a forest or buff an already existing one? And I like the remains in play idea. If they are RIP would you be able to buff a forest you are currently keeping up with RIP? It could make an interesting tactic where a wood elf player can create a firing platform from scratch for a big unit of glade guard.

dryads do already cause fear,my bad. And really I guess the full ward is a good idea.

I'm still not entirely sold on the dragon cost though, again for the record i have zero experience playing with/against dragons, but if you are taking the hydra as a model I think most people would agree it is 30pts under costed anyway and I think it should probably cost a bit more again to lose handlers and gain fly and a ward save over the regen (as everyone comes equipped with something flaming these days).

BTW i know its minor but I would like to see treemen and -kin have the flammable rule back, its just good fluff. i know it is kind of double stacking a vunerability to flaming (with treemen having regen too) but I'd be sad to see that rule go, any way to work it back in?

I don't think the ASF spite needs to go up in points, it's still coming out of your magic item allowance.

I would trade some of the wild riders' stats/rules to lower the cost, I really like wild riders but I personally wouldn't want to spend 200pts on a 5 man unit, they would lose out to other things (like a dragon) at that cost.

And with wardancers I'm not sure because I love the dances and would really like to see them work that way. With the ones in your list if they are going to be getting 2 attacks I think ASF would be a good because of the re-roll to hit.

I like the Rally and Fire idea, it doesn't make glade guard more powerful so much as more reliable. Fire and Flee looks a bit cheesy by comparison! But seriously I think it makes GG a more attractive unit choice just because they are more reliable, being able to move and fire and rally and fire means every unit [i]should[i] be firing every turn.

Side note though the more I like the idea the more spammable it seems. It would be interesting to play test with a GG heavy list. For context, if anyone has read SneakyGobbo's batreps with his skink-cloud army imagine that but with rally-and-fire GG, nasty