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.

Well... with the various leaks of the Votann codex popping up nearly everywhere it seems, I feel like the cat is out of the bag. Since the Leagues of Votann were introduced our game group was immediately interested in seeing how we can convert the new codex into the parlance of classic 40k (3rd-7th edition) in order to provide people using old rule systems with a way to play with the new squat... err... League of Votann forces. Not much more to say by way of introduction! Below is the first cut at assembling this, piecing things together from the information released so far. Please let me know what you think in terms of power, balance, point values, etc.

==================================================
Codex: Votann Classic (google doc)
==================================================

Design Direction

Mostly this was trying to port over the units from the 9th edition stat lines and point values as best as we could. A few important caveats here:

* In general, leadership is one point lower in 8th/9th than in prior editions, so that was bumped up.
* We set the initiative value to 3 for most units. Yes, they're dwarves/squats, but really we think they are more melee oriented than the Tau (for example). We took some liberties adding concussive grenades and other items that function as offensive grenades to the appropriate units.
* In general, we tried to maintain the forces identity as tough/rugged, close to mid-range skirmishers. We reduced the number of wounds on some models to be more in-line with how 3rd-7th edition handled things.
* Spent some time making sense of the melee weapons. There was a lot of trivially different melee weapon stats and so we just consolidated a bunch of them to cut down on the bloat and confusion.
* We tried to cleanup and differentiate the classes of ranged weapons a bit more as well. True to 9th edition there is a deluge of trivially differentiated weapons and we tried to make the various categories of weapons and little more consistent and distinct (HYLas vs. EtaCrn Plasma vs. Ion etc...). Open to feedback on further consolidation.

Lastly - I really want to add (from scratch) another Troop type. I was thinking about some sort of Vertryn Rangers or something to that effect (like ground scouts to complicate the pioneers on Jetbikes).

Let me know what you think!

Your Votann codex looks very promising. We don't play 9th but instead play a homebrew version based more closely on the 3-5 Ed paradigm. A player in our group is thinking of starting something different and the Votann concept appeals to him, so your codex provides a good foundation. Did I overlook your document in looking for weapon and wargear abilities?

There is a second tab in the spreadsheet at that contains all of the wargear and ability details.

Looks pretty good.

I was just thinking about retro designs for them when I realised that you can actually use these models to represent a 2nd Ed squat army with pretty much no modifications.

Just treat the vehicles as a land raider and a razorback.

Each unit existed in the 2nd ed black codex

 Mezmorki wrote:
There is a second tab in the spreadsheet at that contains all of the wargear and ability details.

Ah, thanks! The 'hunTR' designation is not explained in your codex. Would it be the same as Assault weapons in a 'classic' format?

Opps.... the hunTR designation is indeed missing. That should be added to the top of the main tab and describe how it works.

It would NOT be the same as an assault weapon, as assault weapons let you do things like shoot and still charge, which is not the case with HunTR weapons.

I'll add that.

Nice work Mez!

Do you have a points value formula you use when retro-fitting newer models/units back to older editions?

 flakpanzer wrote:
Nice work Mez!

Do you have a points value formula you use when retro-fitting newer models/units back to older editions?

No formula. More about thinking in relative terms. E.G, "here's the price of a space marine vs. guard vs. other similarish role unit - what price point feels right given the differences in performance."

But also comparing that against the 9th edition unit prices. E.G, the hearthguard are X value in 9th and sits between unit Y and unit Z in terms of points. Now look at the 5th edition baseline for unit Y and unit Z, and see where the hearthguard feels right relative to the that.

Wondering if the exoarmour needs toning back.

With void armour, they are only ignored by AP1 weapons, and given the proliferation of AP2 vs 1, that makes them pretty rock hard.

Especially with T5 and W2. Terminators at T4 and W1 are weak by comparison.

I'd either drop void armour for the exoarmour (counter intuitive but works ruleswise), or reduce their W1.

Getting a 2+ save against almost any attack in the game is pretty amazing.

The other option for void armor is to make it work how we do it standard in ProHammer, which is that if you're hit by a weapon where the AP equals your Sv, you take your save with a -1 penalty. So 2+ void armor hit by an AP2 weapon takes a 3+ save. That might work pretty well.

Ah I missed the bit where this was just a retro dex rather than a version for your own ruleset where that mechanic ready existed.

If youre working with the 3-7 rules paradigm then yeah I think using the -1 to save would be a better option.

It's still pretty strong though. Terminators are only T4 w1 and against an ap2 weapon they're dying on anything but a 5+ while the exoarmour gets a 3+ and twice the resilience.

I'd be tempted to also reduce them to 1w as wounds were much more powerful back then.

While i want squats back i think your rules have a bit too much 9th ed influence to be a retro codex. if you want to give them weapons that are imperial but not current era, start throwing in some of the 1.0 30K weapons since they would have never lost access to that tech.

void armor already has rules in 1.0 HH as do many of the similar weapons like rotor cannons, bolt cannons as well as all the volkite weapons.

Giving them a copy/paste railgun from the tau works as well without breaking the game.

The closest comparrison to the exoarmor would be Obliterators from 3.5 ed codex. T5, 2+ save, 2 wounds, 5++ daemon save, deep strike, fearless. Slow & purposeful. 70 points.

Hearthguard would be T5, 2+ save with Void, 2 wounds. Steady advance. Gets judgement tokens, weapons probably aren't quite as potent as the heavy weapons obliterators use. 50 points.

Probably worth bumping up to 60 points? Bear in mind obliterators are a unit of 1-3, whereas hearthguard are 5-10. So at a minimum its a 250 point unit (or 300 points if they cost 60 ppm). Flavor wise, maybe better to reduce their points a little and drop them back to 1W.

Do you have a template you used for this doc? Looks well put together, would be good to use for a couple of ideas I have.

 Mezmorki wrote:
The closest comparrison to the exoarmor would be Obliterators from 3.5 ed codex. T5, 2+ save, 2 wounds, 5++ daemon save, deep strike, fearless. Slow & purposeful. 70 points.

Hearthguard would be T5, 2+ save with Void, 2 wounds. Steady advance. Gets judgement tokens, weapons probably aren't quite as potent as the heavy weapons obliterators use. 50 points.

Probably worth bumping up to 60 points? Bear in mind obliterators are a unit of 1-3, whereas hearthguard are 5-10. So at a minimum its a 250 point unit (or 300 points if they cost 60 ppm). Flavor wise, maybe better to reduce their points a little and drop them back to 1W.

Yeah, I think that in the current paradigm they fit into the terminator niche, rather than the obliterator niche - obliterators in 9th ed are:

5" 3+ 3+ 5 5 5 4 9 2+

Definitely in the more monster category.

So if you take W5 as ~2x their 5th ed wounds, then w2 on exoarmour in 9th would be w1 in 5th. Which makes sense to me.

So T5 W1 2+ but no invulnerable save and your -1 to save for AP2 makes them pretty good - still better than a terminator in most cases as Ap1 is pretty uncommon.