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.

That's the same as Abaddon. But since Abaddon is built for combat, the Despoiler would win in 1v1.

https://comicvine.gamespot.com/a/uploads/original/12/128614/6063243-22m70sr4nzaz.jpg

I don't expect Guilliman to beat up other characters in duels - that's not his role. But come on, he deserves at least 400 points. Give him more abilities to buff his armies to justify the cost. Like making all his buffs to Ultramarines GLOBAL instead of models within 12 inches of him.

I also really dislike the revival thing from Armor of Fate. It's very clunky and a single roll can determine the outcome of the battle since the downed Primarch cannot he shot up again to make sure he is dead. I would rather they just give him Feel No Pain 5+++ or 4+++.

300 pts for the most powerful character in the Imperium is an insult.

Old and not updated yet, most likely just waiting for Space Marines 2.0.

PS: As far as making him cheaper, it might honestly be that they are scared to make him cheap bc he has him a problem unit in the past.

Guilliman has substantial leadership abilities to go along with pretty good combat abilities. He might not be as nasty a beat stick as Abaddon, but he's at least twice the buff-bot.

Master of Battle has twice the radius of The Despoiler. And it works on all Imperium units compared to Core Chaos. But wait! It also give a Bonus to Advance Rolls. But that's not all! It allows you to Re-roll Morale Test. Sorry, Abaddon. RG is better at motivating the masses than you.

Then there is XIII Primarch versus Lord of the Traitor Legions. Ultramarines Core and Ultramarines Characters get to re-roll all attacks compared to one Heretic Astartes Core or Heretic Astartes Character unit. Abaddon is a bit better at motivating that single Black Legion unit since they get full re-rolls to Wound while Guilliman merely allows all the Ultramarines Core units to re-roll ones to Wound.

Yeah. I think good old Bobby G is a better leader model than Failbaddon

Doesn't Abby give movement bonuses too though?

Well i have his very old rules from a WD issue some 20+ years ago and back then he was a whopping 545 points and he was still kind of meh. i mean he is a primarch so he struck at initiative with the gauntlets of ultramar and he (and his retinue) could lead any imperial army. he was mostly there as a lead form the back kind of primarch.

Stats wise he would struggle with the avatar of khaine or a blood thirster from that era but he would slap Abaddon (who was less than half his points) around like a chump.

bibotot wrote:
Like making all his buffs to Ultramarines GLOBAL instead of models within 12 inches of him.

Given marines are often the starter army I do wonder why they don't have unlimited aura ranges for most of their simple buffs. Would make things a lot simpler.

The_Real_Chris wrote:

bibotot wrote:
Like making all his buffs to Ultramarines GLOBAL instead of models within 12 inches of him.

Given marines are often the starter army I do wonder why they don't have unlimited aura ranges for most of their simple buffs. Would make things a lot simpler.

Bc they used to do this and it broke the game. We saw all top lists for a bit was just Gman or 2 other heroes with full armies in a circle around them getting full re-rolls, Aurahammer ruled, it was boring, and bad for the game. Its why we got heavier keyword restrictions ad Core.

Because he shouldnt be on a common gametable.

 jeff white wrote:
Because he shouldnt be on a common gametable.

But Magnas, Knights, Abby, etc... should? You cant say 1 is not allowed and allow the others. He is asking able balance compare to the new releases... which Power creep is the answer.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

The_Real_Chris wrote:

bibotot wrote:
Like making all his buffs to Ultramarines GLOBAL instead of models within 12 inches of him.

Given marines are often the starter army I do wonder why they don't have unlimited aura ranges for most of their simple buffs. Would make things a lot simpler.

Bc they used to do this and it broke the game. We saw all top lists for a bit was just Gman or 2 other heroes with full armies in a circle around them getting full re-rolls, Aurahammer ruled, it was boring, and bad for the game. Its why we got heavier keyword restrictions ad Core.

That sounds like a ranged aura ('in a circle, etc.'). Somewhat different to 'include this, get that for the army'. This is what has happened with Imperial guard - everyone has a vox, so buy an officer and order anything within 18".

bibotot wrote:

I don't expect Guilliman to beat up other characters in duels - that's not his role. But come on, he deserves at least 400 points. Give him more abilities to buff his armies to justify the cost.

I think you just answered your own question. He's 300pts because that's what his stats/abilities etc warrant*. If he had more, he'd cost more.
There is of course the issue of if he's too expensive nobody'll use him, thus hindering sales.

*This is of course debatable, but atm GW thinks 300....

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Because he shouldnt be on a common gametable.

But Magnas, Knights, Abby, etc... should? You cant say 1 is not allowed and allow the others. He is asking able balance compare to the new releases... which Power creep is the answer.

Its jeff, he's been pretty openly anti- named characters/LoW/Flyers already

I think Guilliman is fine at 300 points. The better question is why is Abaddon only 300 points? I think he is undercosted so badly hes nearly an auto-take.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Because he shouldnt be on a common gametable.

But Magnas, Knights, Abby, etc... should? You cant say 1 is not allowed and allow the others. He is asking able balance compare to the new releases... which Power creep is the answer.

Its jeff, he's been pretty openly anti- named characters/LoW/Flyers already

I agree with the flyers part lol.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Because he shouldnt be on a common gametable.

But Magnas, Knights, Abby, etc... should? You cant say 1 is not allowed and allow the others. He is asking able balance compare to the new releases... which Power creep is the answer.

Its jeff, he's been pretty openly anti- named characters/LoW/Flyers already

Jeff's pretty much anti "anything past 4th/5th edition" best I can detrimine.

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Doesn't Abby give movement bonuses too though?

Abaddon gives +1 to Charge Rolls in a 6" radius. Guilliman gives +1 to Charge and Advance Rolls in a 12" radius.

BrianDavion wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Because he shouldnt be on a common gametable.

But Magnas, Knights, Abby, etc... should? You cant say 1 is not allowed and allow the others. He is asking able balance compare to the new releases... which Power creep is the answer.

Its jeff, he's been pretty openly anti- named characters/LoW/Flyers already

Jeff's pretty much anti "anything past 4th/5th edition" best I can detrimine.

Ummm. Yes and no. I do not like cards, and random charges, and clunky terrain rules, etc.

Named chars were a thing in 2nd, for example. I wouldnt use them then, either. Nobody would, unless a pre planned scenario warranted it... anyways, just my experience, and preference, regardless of edition.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Because he shouldnt be on a common gametable.

But Magnas, Knights, Abby, etc... should? You cant say 1 is not allowed and allow the others. He is asking able balance compare to the new releases... which Power creep is the answer.

i am on the same boat of most of those should not really be on the gamer table.

i think knights should be an ally faction where imperium and chaos can add one as an ally (or up to three little knights, armigers war dogs or whatever names they are given these days) below 2000 points. other lords of war should likewise be made good but 1 per 2k point game. Most names characters should be amazing overbuffed monsters reserved for 2k+ point games. primarchs should imo be more on the introduce at 5k points matches.

I remember a little narative escalation campaign we did back in 8th(possibly early 9th i would need to find the paper remnants of the campaign) . Story was a strange signal came from a desolate world, it matched signatures of pre age of darkness tech. the signal was weak but multiple imperial chaos and xenos factions detected it. So by game 4 Magnus, Mortarion, and Roboute had all taken the field. Lessons were learned and future narrative missions included a strict no named characters with zero exemptions policy, models can be proxied as generic HQs to show off a nicely painted model.

Models like Guilliman, Nagash, greater daemons etc are really hard to balance at this level and usually end up oberwhelming or disappointing. Id go for the side of overwhelming as for me they only come out on special narrative occasions and the scenarion will have some rules regarding them.

Dai wrote:
Models like Guilliman, Nagash, greater daemons etc are really hard to balance at this level and usually end up oberwhelming or disappointing. Id go for the side of overwhelming as for me they only come out on special narrative occasions and the scenarion will have some rules regarding them.

in some groups that is the case for these powerful hero characters. the issue is the competitive meta and more importantly the netlisters who think they are the best players because they copy and paste those lists. when Gman fist came out there were parking lots of tanks spewing dakka rerolling all failed to hits and to wounds in a huge bubble. it was not a great time for the game. in my core group of players none of us used that list unless the others wanted tournament practice games but every time i went to a flgs somebody was running it and trying to run against me. playing orks mostly because they wanted a weak faction to lose against them without them taking any casualties.

They should just make special characters, at least ones like Guilliman or Nagash, intentionally overpowered and then just have them banned for tournament play the way Pokemon does Legendary Pokemon tbh.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
They should just make special characters, at least ones like Guilliman or Nagash, intentionally overpowered and then just have them banned for tournament play the way Pokemon does Legendary Pokemon tbh.

that'd be great assuming 40K suddenly dropped the absurd "EVERY GAME I PLAY MUST BE TREATED LIKE IT'S A GRAND TOURNMENT" mentality so many people seemingly have

BrianDavion wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
They should just make special characters, at least ones like Guilliman or Nagash, intentionally overpowered and then just have them banned for tournament play the way Pokemon does Legendary Pokemon tbh.

that'd be great assuming 40K suddenly dropped the absurd "EVERY GAME I PLAY MUST BE TREATED LIKE IT'S A GRAND TOURNMENT" mentality so many people seemingly have

Well, while i agree with this there are few major issues.

1) Players will evolve as they play each other, they get better, they get bored of old units and want new units, and as they play more and more games they learn about their army more and more, tweaking better weapons, gear, and even changing units. Bc it is slow it doesn't look like they are playing to win, but with each lost and even with wins they progress their list to get better and better with will force other players to do the same thing and slowly the group starts to be more in that mind set even if they feel they are not.

2) Balance is so bad that sadly it doesn't work unless you both agree to a certain power level. If you have 2 fluffy armies, well sadly no fluffy army is equal to another and you'll have blow outs, even if both are no optimized at all. You can also just have skewed lists, like Knights vs horde nids. Or Kabal based DE vs Tank base Guard. 1 is clearly going to win. So players tend to try and meet in the middle then and agree at a power level, well the easiest way to do that is just picking up the "balanced" playbook aka Chapter Approve.

3) Many players just know the game isn't balanced and when a balance update comes out they are wanting to get it to just be as balanced as they can.

4) Finally, the internet heavily speeds up the progress of the "meta" picks of an army, we can know the best list many times within a day of a book release, heck the DE community with 20min saw Coven DT with Succubus and Incubi was by far the best and was actively calling for a FAQ for DT and Comp Edge, most main DE players didn't even want DT and yet not only did it stay but they buffed it to extreme levels. Within a week players meta jump on that wagon expect for a lot of the DE community was trying to hold back in doing so.

Now this will not apply to everyone, and with my 4th as you read not everyone that plays for balance and uses the GT books wants to be GT level of list, they are looking for balance, so when a lot of players just want balance yeah it will feel like "EVERY GAME I PLAY MUST BE TREATED LIKE IT'S A GRAND TOURNMENT" but for many really they are not purposely power gaming to the extreme to win.

It isn't just power gaming. when some books have to run tournament, or almost tournament, lists to have a semblance of fun playing other armies casual lists, people will be careful to pick bad units or bad armies as their starter. People who play for 20+ years, with multiple armies, yeah they can pick up what ever they want and play any edition they feel like running. Great for them. But try convincing strangers to play under 5th ed rules, because you think that in 5th your army was the most fun to play. And they don't even have to be donkey-cave. their armies could be unfun to play in 5th, they may not have the rules or the models that made lists back then.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
They should just make special characters, at least ones like Guilliman or Nagash, intentionally overpowered and then just have them banned for tournament play the way Pokemon does Legendary Pokemon tbh.

that'd be great assuming 40K suddenly dropped the absurd "EVERY GAME I PLAY MUST BE TREATED LIKE IT'S A GRAND TOURNMENT" mentality so many people seemingly have

That will exist till casual lists of some armies can beat tournament lists of other factions, the game will be played and bought like that. There is no going around it, unless GW suddenly decides to sell their armies at 1/5th the cost.

 jeff white wrote:

Ummm. Yes and no. I do not like cards, and random charges, and clunky terrain rules, etc.

Named chars were a thing in 2nd, for example. I wouldnt use them then, either. Nobody would, unless a pre planned scenario warranted it... anyways, just my experience, and preference, regardless of edition.

Ah Yes, to just play the cards and play the game. 40K needs to do what Battletech did and make an Alpha Strike ruleset.

 Lobukia wrote:

Ah Yes, to just play the cards and play the game. 40K needs to do what Battletech did and make an Alpha Strike ruleset.

it already exists, its called Grimdark Future and its made by OnePageRules