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.

So this is veeery early as he won't have seen much play in general yet, but I think we can see for his cost his stats and abilities are somewhat lacklustre. Cool model and not 'bad' but could have been a lot more interesting. The issues I see are as follows:

Loses half of his meaningful shooting after 5 wounds, and the other half after 10 wounds.

Reroll to hit aura only buffs Core shooting and Triarch Praetorians. The Core shooting is all 1-damage, while the Praetorians don't really want to be hugging him and also have a short range on their weapons anyway.

Reroll to wound aura only buffs Core melee and Triarch Praetorians. Nice boost for the Troops who could actually hold their own if they're Novokh, but in general it's going to be difficult to get much use out of this. Praetorians have the same issue as above, and the only version of Lychguard that would feel comfortable walking up with him have 1-damage weapons.

Only a single deny with no bonus.

No mortal wound output despite C'tan on the model.

Decent combat but definitely not enough to make him worth his huge points cost.


I think with a few tweaks he'd be a lot more appealing. Give him a bonus to his deny, allow his to-wound aura to affect Core shooting as well as melee or allow him to buff non-core models in some way, and give him 1 C'tan power. Maybe give him access to the Entropic Strike strat to make his melee truly terrifying and give you access to this even with no C'tan.

Too much? Not enough?

Want me to give you an honest but almost certainly unpopular answer?

Models like The Silent King should not exist in the first place. Because these are characters that have no place whatsoever just appearing on a random battlefield somewhere. It would be like statting The Emperor and just having him arrive in a random skirmish, throne and all, and start fighting like any other mook. These are characters that should stay entirely within the background. Their influence should be felt in the movement of fleets and in strategies that decide the fate of entire systems - not in tiny battlefield skirmishes. It makes the world feel very small and puts these characters on the level of Saturday-morning cartoon villains.

"I'll get you next time, Guilliman!" The Silent King cries from the ruins of his throne, his defeated army lying in charred bits around him. "Next time!"


However, if you absolutely, positively, must include a character like the Silent King, just make him an actual character. Same as they've already done with the Stormlord. Just because a given character is important, it don't mean they need their own diorama. If they do, this might be yet another splendid opportunity to go back and ask yourself whether they really need to exist on the table in the first place.

Anyway, by having them as just an infantry character (which the Silent King clearly is, sans his stupid throne), then you don't need to worry about trying to balance a pseudo-super-heavy in a game with a dismal history of such.

Alternatively, maybe use what you've already got and put the Silent King on a modified Catacomb Command Barge. That way, he can still have a more centrepiece-type model, but you've already got a reasonable set of rules for how it should work, which can be tweaked as necessary, rather than needing to stat a ludicrous hover-throne thing from scratch.

I would drop his points by about 100 and give him 1 ctan power. I would also give the mehnris 3++ saves.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I would drop his points by about 100 and give him 1 ctan power. I would also give the mehnris 3++ saves.

Good god in heaven, I hope GW doesn't ever hire you.

Oh, we’re talking rules? Because I was going to say “Don't Needlessly retcon him to be more evil and shallow than he was in his pre-9th fluff, it’s amusing for one of the more pleasant characters in the setting to be an robotic skeleton emperor.”

Also, he explicitly destroyed his command protocols after taking down the C’tan, so Necrons should only be falling in behind his return of their own free will, not out of Ethereal style mind control.

I think the Silent King is very strong if not downright OP.

If anything, he needs to go up another 50-100 points.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
I would drop his points by about 100 and give him 1 ctan power. I would also give the mehnris 3++ saves.

Good god in heaven, I hope GW doesn't ever hire you.

The ctan power might be a bit much with the point I suggeted drops but it has a ctan on it, so it just seems like he should have that. As it stands right now. His cost is way too high. He degrades to worthlessness. If he degraded like a knight and didn't lose his best weapon after 10 wounds he still wouldn't be incredible. Knights move 12" - he moves 8. His buffs look like they would be really valuable but they aren't - rerolling to hit with core is decent but with MWBD 2 times anyways he already has 2 10 man immortal squads hitting on 2's (any overlord can do this). His melee buff is rather insignificant too considering he isn't going to survive long enough to buff melee units (core melee units necrons really don't have ether) Praetorians are good units BUT have a different battlefield roll than this guy. He has lots of schizophrenic rules which seem good on paper but look deeper. He is easily the worst costed unit in the Necron dex. The Monolith which most people are inaccurately down on puts him to shame.

Oh my gentle jesus do not make him better than he already is. He's already an absolute house when you've built around him.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I think the Silent King is very strong if not downright OP.

If anything, he needs to go up another 50-100 points.

What 500 point unit do you think he compares to so we can do a proper evaluation.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I think the Silent King is very strong if not downright OP.

If anything, he needs to go up another 50-100 points.

What 500 point unit do you think he compares to so we can do a proper evaluation.

A stormsword with one set of sponsons (540)

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I think the Silent King is very strong if not downright OP.

If anything, he needs to go up another 50-100 points.

What 500 point unit do you think he compares to so we can do a proper evaluation.

A stormsword with one set of sponsons (540)

Okay so...lets not just pick some obscure unplayable version of a tank which has much better versions for the same price. Banehammer/Shadowsword 1 shot the silent king or damn close to it. 1 turn of shooting is ensured to take 10 wounds off him at the very least. Then he has no chance at reprisal. We are also talking about overcosted units to begin with...you can't tell me a baneblade varriant is a completive pointed unit atm. Knights ofc are the best comparison because they have shooting and melee and comparable durability. A knight crusader is vastly superior to the silent king.

I agree with Vipoid but if we had to make some changes to the Silent King, I think the big change I'd make is allow his buffs to affect Triarch units anywhere on the table. That seems fluffy and also gets around one of the biggest problems with his Triarch buffs: the short range.

One thing I'd really like GW to do at some point is show some restraint in their uber-characters. If we have to have them, how about something more interesting than a literal page of rules, all of which just pile buff upon buff upon inflated statline? For example, why is it that all the SM Chapter Masters are combat monsters? Why isn't at least one of them just given a Captain statline and rules to refelct their tactical acumen? It just feels like all these types of characters are an exercise in creating a "regular character +1" instead of providing interesting options for players.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I think the Silent King is very strong if not downright OP.

If anything, he needs to go up another 50-100 points.

What 500 point unit do you think he compares to so we can do a proper evaluation.

A stormsword with one set of sponsons (540)

Okay so...lets not just pick some obscure unplayable version of a tank which has much better versions for the same price. Banehammer/Shadowsword 1 shot the silent king or damn close to it. 1 turn of shooting is ensured to take 10 wounds off him at the very least. Then he has no chance at reprisal. We are also talking about overcosted units to begin with...you can't tell me a baneblade varriant is a completive pointed unit atm. Knights ofc are the best comparison because they have shooting and melee and comparable durability. A knight crusader is vastly superior to the silent king.

Hey man, you let me pick a unit, I picked it. And it can't be that obscure, I got the name and points cost off the top of my head...

Slipspace wrote:
I agree with Vipoid but if we had to make some changes to the Silent King, I think the big change I'd make is allow his buffs to affect Triarch units anywhere on the table. That seems fluffy and also gets around one of the biggest problems with his Triarch buffs: the short range.

One thing I'd really like GW to do at some point is show some restraint in their uber-characters. If we have to have them, how about something more interesting than a literal page of rules, all of which just pile buff upon buff upon inflated statline? For example, why is it that all the SM Chapter Masters are combat monsters? Why isn't at least one of them just given a Captain statline and rules to refelct their tactical acumen? It just feels like all these types of characters are an exercise in creating a "regular character +1" instead of providing interesting options for players.

I think it is implied that a space marine that has survived constant combat for 150+ years is going to be skilled in all aspects of war. I get what you are saying. Silent king exists though and is a beautiful model. All players should want beautiful models on the table because in the end the thing we enjoy is looking at well painted models and having fun. It is not fun when 1/4 of your army is made useless from a single shooting phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I think the Silent King is very strong if not downright OP.

If anything, he needs to go up another 50-100 points.

What 500 point unit do you think he compares to so we can do a proper evaluation.

A stormsword with one set of sponsons (540)

Okay so...lets not just pick some obscure unplayable version of a tank which has much better versions for the same price. Banehammer/Shadowsword 1 shot the silent king or damn close to it. 1 turn of shooting is ensured to take 10 wounds off him at the very least. Then he has no chance at reprisal. We are also talking about overcosted units to begin with...you can't tell me a baneblade varriant is a completive pointed unit atm. Knights ofc are the best comparison because they have shooting and melee and comparable durability. A knight crusader is vastly superior to the silent king.

Hey man, you let me pick a unit, I picked it. And it can't be that obscure, I got the name and points cost off the top of my head...

I honestly have never heard of a storm sword...storm lord yes...never a storm sword. IMO when it comes to baneblade varrients...we are really talking about baneblades/shadowswords/banehammers - the rest are utter garbage. The idea here is I want you to suggest an actually playable unit he compares to in cost - so we can see how much worse the SK is.

 vipoid wrote:
Want me to give you an honest but almost certainly unpopular answer?

Models like The Silent King should not exist in the first place. Because these are characters that have no place whatsoever just appearing on a random battlefield somewhere. It would be like statting The Emperor and just having him arrive in a random skirmish, throne and all, and start fighting like any other mook. These are characters that should stay entirely within the background. Their influence should be felt in the movement of fleets and in strategies that decide the fate of entire systems - not in tiny battlefield skirmishes. It makes the world feel very small and puts these characters on the level of Saturday-morning cartoon villains.

"I'll get you next time, Guilliman!" The Silent King cries from the ruins of his throne, his defeated army lying in charred bits around him. "Next time!"


However, if you absolutely, positively, must include a character like the Silent King, just make him an actual character. Same as they've already done with the Stormlord. Just because a given character is important, it don't mean they need their own diorama. If they do, this might be yet another splendid opportunity to go back and ask yourself whether they really need to exist on the table in the first place.

Anyway, by having them as just an infantry character (which the Silent King clearly is, sans his stupid throne), then you don't need to worry about trying to balance a pseudo-super-heavy in a game with a dismal history of such.

Alternatively, maybe use what you've already got and put the Silent King on a modified Catacomb Command Barge. That way, he can still have a more centrepiece-type model, but you've already got a reasonable set of rules for how it should work, which can be tweaked as necessary, rather than needing to stat a ludicrous hover-throne thing from scratch.

Well you are about decade too late. It's　too late so now it must be made　he's neither too weak nor too good

I've had some games in with the Silent King and at this point I don't think he is that good or that bad really. Yes he loses fire power as he loses wounds, but from the get go he can do some serious work. I do not mind the fact that he degrades in the manner that he does and it is a system that I hope they bring to other center piece models.

I've not had him dominate the battlefield, except in one game against Grey Knights but Grey Knights are just bad, nor have I ever felt like he was a waste of points.

Arbiter_Shade wrote:
I've had some games in with the Silent King and at this point I don't think he is that good or that bad really. Yes he loses fire power as he loses wounds, but from the get go he can do some serious work. I do not mind the fact that he degrades in the manner that he does and it is a system that I hope they bring to other center piece models.

I've not had him dominate the battlefield, except in one game against Grey Knights but Grey Knights are just bad, nor have I ever felt like he was a waste of points.

450 point models...when they don't get destroyed. Should dominate games. It's how the game works.

The Silent King is fine.

 vipoid wrote:
Want me to give you an honest but almost certainly unpopular answer?

Models like The Silent King should not exist in the first place. Because these are characters that have no place whatsoever just appearing on a random battlefield somewhere. It would be like statting The Emperor and just having him arrive in a random skirmish, throne and all, and start fighting like any other mook. These are characters that should stay entirely within the background. Their influence should be felt in the movement of fleets and in strategies that decide the fate of entire systems - not in tiny battlefield skirmishes. It makes the world feel very small and puts these characters on the level of Saturday-morning cartoon villains.

"I'll get you next time, Guilliman!" The Silent King cries from the ruins of his throne, his defeated army lying in charred bits around him. "Next time!"

I 100% agree with this. I am actually of the opinion that there should not be any named characters at all regardless of how minor that character may be. Just like vipoid said, the inclusion of these characters(the bigger names especially) shrinks the galaxy. I don't want to know how a primarch handles himself on a small scale battle with these rules. The Black Library tells me all I need to know about the primarchs and how ridiculously awesome they are. I want to know how Bill, the Chapter Master of the Iron Generics, handles himself and his forces when they face the growing Ork WAAAGH! of Klawknuckle Spleenpunch.

Selfcontrol wrote:
The Silent King is fine.

You must think a knight crusader is super OP then.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Selfcontrol wrote:
The Silent King is fine.

You must think a knight crusader is super OP then.

I am truly amazed at how every single time you talk, you sound like a complete buffoon.

Selfcontrol wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Selfcontrol wrote:
The Silent King is fine.

You must think a knight crusader is super OP then.

I am truly amazed at how every single time you talk, you sound like a complete buffoon.

Maybe the nuance is just lost on you. These units have about the same point cost and perform drastically different. As in the crusader is a lot better. Like..A lot. The crusader is not even an amazing choice ether. Trival for most armies to drop one in a single turn.

You must think a knight crusader is super OP then

.

As in the crusader is a lot better.

I am truly amazed at how every single time you talk, you sound like a complete buffoon.

I rest my case.

I think he's fine at 450.

Certainly if you knock off 100 points he's the auto-take to end all auto-takes.

As Vipoid said, I'm not sure this stuff should be in 40k - both fluffwise, or mechanically. If it has to be I certainly don't want it to be near mandatory for every Necron player.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Arbiter_Shade wrote:
I've had some games in with the Silent King and at this point I don't think he is that good or that bad really. Yes he loses fire power as he loses wounds, but from the get go he can do some serious work. I do not mind the fact that he degrades in the manner that he does and it is a system that I hope they bring to other center piece models.

I've not had him dominate the battlefield, except in one game against Grey Knights but Grey Knights are just bad, nor have I ever felt like he was a waste of points.

450 point models...when they don't get destroyed. Should dominate games. It's how the game works.

450 points models that dominate the game are typically massively undercosted though. An ork naut is 340 points and while it's fine as it is it definitely doesn't dominate anything. Silent king is easily better than a naut and worths its 450 points.

Knights should be 550+ points models.

Anyway, Grey Knights are far from being "just bad", they're actually pretty solid.

 Blackie wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Arbiter_Shade wrote:
I've had some games in with the Silent King and at this point I don't think he is that good or that bad really. Yes he loses fire power as he loses wounds, but from the get go he can do some serious work. I do not mind the fact that he degrades in the manner that he does and it is a system that I hope they bring to other center piece models.

I've not had him dominate the battlefield, except in one game against Grey Knights but Grey Knights are just bad, nor have I ever felt like he was a waste of points.

450 point models...when they don't get destroyed. Should dominate games. It's how the game works.

450 points models that dominate the game are typically massively undercosted though. An ork naut is 340 points and while it's fine as it is it definitely doesn't dominate anything. Silent king is easily better than a naut and worths its 450 points.

Knights should be 550+ points models.

Anyway, Grey Knights are far from being "just bad", they're actually pretty solid.

I would love to hear how Grey Knights are solid cause my main opponent plays them regularly and no matter how I try to help him make them work I have never had a close game against them. I always stream roll them no matter what army I bring, even Chaos Demons.

Shouldn't be in the game in the first place like the primarchs or pretty much any LoW, but he's totally fine for his points value. The only LoW I can think of that's actually worth his points. I actually think GW got him just about right in terms of value, something they very rarely do with big models.

If you don't know how to use him he'll be terribad, that's for certain. For example, the idea that the guns on his menhir are really a significant part of the model. They're just a neat bonus alpha strike on the turn he comes out of hiding, they're not meant to stay active very long.

His value comes from the whole package, not any one little thing. He adds a deny (and access to a 4+ deny strat) to any army that otherwise has limited access to it. He gives tremendous buffs to <CORE> units, which are otherwise somewhat anemic. He has a fight last aura, which is a tremendously powerful ability to have in an army. He fights well. He shoots well. He doesn't meaningful degrade (no, again, losing the menhir shots is not a big deal) until you've done 16 wounds to him. He can auto-explode for 1CP for 1d6 MW in a 2d6 bubble. He gives you much more reliability on your protocols.

The list of stuff he does is just so long, and if you aren't getting value out of each bit, he's going to seem weak. But that's fine. He's a high skill cap model that you need to have a plan for how you are going to use him effectively, not a derp2win button you just leroy jenkins up the table and expect to get value.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Shouldn't be in the game in the first place like the primarchs or pretty much any LoW, but he's totally fine for his points value. The only LoW I can think of that's actually worth his points. I actually think GW got him just about right in terms of value, something they very rarely do with big models.

If you don't know how to use him he'll be terribad, that's for certain. For example, the idea that the guns on his menhir are really a significant part of the model. They're just a neat bonus alpha strike on the turn he comes out of hiding, they're not meant to stay active very long.

His value comes from the whole package, not any one little thing. He adds a deny (and access to a 4+ deny strat) to any army that otherwise has limited access to it. He gives tremendous buffs to <CORE> units, which are otherwise somewhat anemic. He has a fight last aura, which is a tremendously powerful ability to have in an army. He fights well. He shoots well. He doesn't meaningful degrade (no, again, losing the menhir shots is not a big deal) until you've done 16 wounds to him. He can auto-explode for 1CP for 1d6 MW in a 2d6 bubble. He gives you much more reliability on your protocols.

The list of stuff he does is just so long, and if you aren't getting value out of each bit, he's going to seem weak. But that's fine. He's a high skill cap model that you need to have a plan for how you are going to use him effectively, not a derp2win button you just leroy jenkins up the table and expect to get value.

Dude...losing your main firepower is a big deal. It's hard to think of anything that could be a bigger deal other than maybe...losing all your firepower.

If you think those guns represent a significant aspect of the model, you shouldn't be using him, you're not going to be getting value from him using him in that way.

He's not a gun platform. The menhir are just ablative wounds with a couple bonus shots tacked on on the turn you bring him out of obscuring, they're not meant to be something you're using for multiple turns.

People see the awesome profile and think that's why you take the model, without realizing they're pointed like one-use weapons. It's like having two of the tachyron arrow relics basically.

He's a totally schizophrenic model with a bajillion different rules, there's no doubt about that. That means it's tough to get the most out of him. But that's ok, I'd much rather have a big model like that be good but difficult to use than be either derp2win or garbage the way most LoWs are.

Personally I like the model but never plan to purchase it. It just seems like its too easy for him to become a crutch, like Guilliman, Magnus or Pertabo (sp).

I could see him being fun in a greater than 2000 point game, but in the lower point games...no thanks.