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 decided to dabble in a spot of paint and make a datasheet for a Thanatar. It's probably overpowered but at least it might inspire some more thorough homebrew whilst we wait for the new codex.

Edit: Image linked borked or I am just dumb, tried uploading a png.

I wouldn’t make you reroll successful saves with Cover-it’d be much simpler to just ignore cover entirely.

Edit: According to math, the only save value where Plasma Wave is less effective than Ignores Cover is 2+, AFTER all modifiers are applied.

2+, reroll successes is better than 3+.
But 3+, reroll successes is worse than 4+. Likewise for 4+ RRS and 5+. And so on.

The gun is way too strong (a LRBT with a similar stat line only has D6+3 shots), re-roll saves is needlessly complicated and should be ignores cover, and the retaliation shots on saves should be limited to 3" or maybe 6" at most. Deflecting a shot from close range makes sense, automatically hitting back against a mortar round fired from behind LOS blocking terrain is silly.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:
The gun is way too strong (a LRBT with a similar stat line only has D6+3 shots), re-roll saves is needlessly complicated and should be ignores cover, and the retaliation shots on saves should be limited to 3" or maybe 6" at most. Deflecting a shot from close range makes sense, automatically hitting back against a mortar round fired from behind LOS blocking terrain is silly.

The Repulsor Grid isn't a new rule-it exists on Kastelans already.

And a Leman Russ Executioner does not only have an extra point of Damage, it's also 60 points cheaper.

Chiming in to agree that the rerolling successful saves thing should probably just be ignores cover.

I assume the fluff for that makes sense. It's a ball of plasma that you can shoot out of line of sight. So I assume it's shooting like, a big ol' plasma bomb/grenade that detonates after it lands? In which case, it seems like standing behind a barricade would maybe be useful...

I'm not sure what russes and other "big plasma" weapons are doing this edition, but hazardous on a weapon with that many attacks feels a little off. If it's packing enough oomph to fire that many shots at higher-than-normal-plasma strength, it feels like it should have the potential to suffer more than 1/12th health loss. But that's me nitpicking.

More nitpicking: I don't love the Enhanced Targeting Array. It creates extra rolling, and it doesn't seem to represent any particularly unique fluff. Unless you feel BS 3+ would be overkill but BS4+ is insufficient, I'd probably just scrap the rule. Or maybe move the "ignores cover" rule to the array if you want to draw attention to how super special its targeting system is.

Overly critical gripes aside, I think this is a workable starting point. Without pulling my index up, I'm pretty sure this thing's statline is somewhat comparable to a wraith lord's, so I'd probably start there and add a few extra points on for the super gun. Very roughly eyeballing it and working off of memory, I'd do something like wraithlord cost +40 points.

If you think it's OP you should just give it a higher cost.

You generally don't see copied abilities in 10th edition, so you should find something different as an ability instead of copying an existing thing (yay bloat).

Why does Enhanced Targeting Array need to be equipment? Generally, this would be an ability unless other models can choose to take one.

OC 3 seems low, I might be off something to take a look at maybe.

Just made some changes to the datasheet and additionally realised that the protocol buff from paragon doesn't work without changing a keyword on the datasmith card and adding one to kastelans.

With that in mind I also submit the following changes
Cybernetica Datasmith - "Battle Protocols" - Replace all instances of "Kastelan Robots" with the keyword "Automaton"
Kastelan Robots - Add the keyword "Automaton"

Xirmant wrote:
Just made some changes to the datasheet and additionally realised that the protocol buff from paragon doesn't work without changing a keyword on the datasmith card and adding one to kastelans.

With that in mind I also submit the following changes
Cybernetica Datasmith - "Battle Protocols" - Replace all instances of "Kastelan Robots" with the keyword "Automaton"
Kastelan Robots - Add the keyword "Automaton"

Any reason why Thanatar cannot have the Kastelan Robot keyword? I know it might not be standard, but changing two existing datasheets seems like a bad idea to me. Otherwise just give it an ability that says it can be targeted by the Datasmith despite lacking the right keyword.

The unit seems a bit overtuned. Most of the other comments seem accurate:

*Stat Block: Seem fine and very similar to the Aeldari Wraithlord. Not sure why it needs 12 wounds compared to Wraithlords 10, especially given it has an Invulnderable Save.

*Weapons: First off, the two Mortar Profiles need the Pick One notation to show they are not two different weapons. Secondly, most heavy blast indirect artillery weapons are either d6+3 or 2d6 attacks. D6+6 is just too much, so it should change to one of those. That being said, the Thanatar is BS4 in HH, so it can either be Heavy or BS 3+. As others have said, Plasma Wave is easily covered by No Cover in a 10th Edition context.

Abilities: Deadly Demise over 1 is generally in dice, so D3 rather than 3. Does this model have a Repulser Grid type rule in HH? If not, why does it have it here? Enhanced Targeting Array is fine.

Paragon of Metal: Feels more like an Enhancement than a unit upgrade in 10th Edition terms. Without seeing the backside of the datasheet, looks like a no brainer always take option. I would drop it from the datasheet entirely.