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.

ignoring all the codex specific traits, and only looking at the ones available in the BRB, what is your opinion on the Warlord traits?

My group and I discussed this, and found that we all agree they are clustered in the completely wrong way.
Let me explain:

We feel that getting a random buff on your warlord is a really cool idea. Especially since most of them are at the very least unit buffs, not just things to make the character an unstoppable force, but well thought out unit wide or even army wide buffs.

But the traits are grouped as follows:
Command Traits
Personal Traits
Strategic Traits

We feel that the choice of list is largely irrelevant. The only reason to choose one over another is if
1) there are more things you would like to have in one list than another, giving you a larger chance to get something that fits your army by sheer numbers or
2) you are hoping for luck to snipe that one trait you would like.

If you're playing a defensive front and you get Master of Offence, you've gotten exactly nothing at all. Rolling 1 lower would have given you something awesome.
I like random, but getting something useless is not *fun*. It makes a fun rule counter intuitive.

We were of the opinion that you should have been able to have a better chance of gaining something that, while not your favourite trait, still gives you something, and wanted the traits to be grouped this way instead:
Offensive Traits
Defensive Traits
Strategic Traits

Off and Def are pretty obvious. Def would grant you the boons of staying back or better cover saves and so on.
Offensive would do the opposite. Charge through cover and being in the enemy deployment zone.
Strategic would be something akin to what it is now. Things that can help anywhere on the battlefield or that will show you off to have a mind that matches Creed.

I'm curious. How would you like the Traits? Do you think they are perfect the way they are?

My friends and I just roll a D6 and choose from whichever list.

Doesn't apply to me anymore because I always take Eldrad.

 DeffDred wrote:
My friends and I just roll a D6 and choose from whichever list.

Doesn't apply to me anymore because I always take Eldrad.

My god I am stealing this idea for friendly games. Which are the only kinda I play. Thankyou!

^ We do that too.

The Eldar codex ones suck, I keep getting ones I can't use and the codex doesn't let your re-roll like the Tau one does :(

Necrons don't even get a WL table. I have to use the BRB table.
The only really good ones for a cron army are the strategic ones though, so that narrows it down.

Huh I like the Eldar traights. The only one I don't like is the deep strike one. All the rest... I really like.

 DeffDred wrote:
My friends and I just roll a D6 and choose from whichever list.

Doesn't apply to me anymore because I always take Eldrad.

I think I may suggest that one myself to my group.

The best way to do it, is to roll 1 dice, then pick any of that number from one of the tables. This makes it more balanced to ones that come in the book, which 9/10, give you a good one for your army, because they are tailored to your specific codex.

I believe it was originally going to be like this, but they thought it would slow the pre-game down, so they changed to picking a table beforehand. Silly, really.

I play sisters and one of my opponents was a rules lawyer. Told me I couldn't use the command trait "inspiring presence" I just rolled for St. Celestine. Reasoning was the entry says uses "HIS" leadership. Guy was completely serious. Told him he was full of s***. I packed up off the table and went to play a friend and had fun. I dont think I was in the wrong there. Never played that guy before, Probably not going to again either. My time for wargaming is my time spent to have fun.

DeffDred wrote:My friends and I just roll a D6 and choose from whichever list.

Doesn't apply to me anymore because I always take Eldrad.

Purifier wrote:
We were of the opinion that you should have been able to have a better chance of gaining something that, while not your favourite trait, still gives you something, and wanted the traits to be grouped this way instead:
Offensive Traits
Defensive Traits
Strategic Traits

This sounds really good. I like that idea a lot.

DeffDred wrote:My friends and I just roll a D6 and choose from whichever list.

Doesn't apply to me anymore because I always take Eldrad.

In the meantime I think I will use this 'house rule'. Nifty.

 conker249 wrote:
I play sisters and one of my opponents was a rules lawyer. Told me I couldn't use the command trait "inspiring presence" I just rolled for St. Celestine. Reasoning was the entry says uses "HIS" leadership. Guy was completely serious. Told him he was full of s***. I packed up off the table and went to play a friend and had fun. I dont think I was in the wrong there. Never played that guy before, Probably not going to again either. My time for wargaming is my time spent to have fun.

LMAO, you made the right decision, I am sure things could only have gone downhill from there.

 conker249 wrote:
I play sisters and one of my opponents was a rules lawyer. Told me I couldn't use the command trait "inspiring presence" I just rolled for St. Celestine. Reasoning was the entry says uses "HIS" leadership. Guy was completely serious. Told him he was full of s***. I packed up off the table and went to play a friend and had fun. I dont think I was in the wrong there. Never played that guy before, Probably not going to again either. My time for wargaming is my time spent to have fun.

I wish this was a joke, but yeah, rule nazis can be a pain.

My groups basic routine is that if you Roll something that is Useless to your army, like the one that gives your army Acute Senses and you Play Space Wolves. We just let you Re-Roll.

would have packed up too.
People like that just aren't worth playing.

My opinion of warlord trait is that they are great. I love that you can really screw up your opponents battle plans and force them on their toe's.
What I do not like is that people are so finicky about them. There is this local necron player that complains he cant use any except 2.
What ticks me off though is he asks is you can roll then choose the one you want based off that number. I asked if i can do the same, just with my tau codex allowed aswell, he said no i cant. So i only get 1 table, but you get 3?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
My opinion of warlord trait is that they are great. I love that you can really screw up your opponents battle plans and force them on their toe's.
What I do not like is that people are so finicky about them. There is this local necron player that complains he cant use any except 2.
What ticks me off though is he asks is you can roll then choose the one you want based off that number. I asked if i can do the same, just with my tau codex allowed aswell, he said no i cant. So i only get 1 table, but you get 3?

If he won't allow you to do it, don't allow him too.

If I forget to move a unit before shooting but immediately remember to after a single unit fires/casts/does something...

I'll ask if it's cool for me to go back and move that one unit.

If they say no, I won't mind... but I won't allow you to go back AT ALL for the rest of the game.

If you say yes, I will look forward to the moment I can return the favor.

That isn't even rules lawyering, its just sexist.

 conker249 wrote:
I play sisters and one of my opponents was a rules lawyer. Told me I couldn't use the command trait "inspiring presence" I just rolled for St. Celestine. Reasoning was the entry says uses "HIS" leadership. Guy was completely serious. Told him he was full of s***. I packed up off the table and went to play a friend and had fun. I dont think I was in the wrong there. Never played that guy before, Probably not going to again either. My time for wargaming is my time spent to have fun.

Tweak his nose and tell him "you're a silly boy" before walking off as condescendingly as possible.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 conker249 wrote:
I play sisters and one of my opponents was a rules lawyer. Told me I couldn't use the command trait "inspiring presence" I just rolled for St. Celestine. Reasoning was the entry says uses "HIS" leadership. Guy was completely serious. Told him he was full of s***. I packed up off the table and went to play a friend and had fun. I dont think I was in the wrong there. Never played that guy before, Probably not going to again either. My time for wargaming is my time spent to have fun.

I wish this was a joke, but yeah, rule nazis can be a pain.

You mean " idiots who don't understand that 'his' in English is the default gender-neutral pronoun" can be a pain. That's not even RAW abuse, it's just a basic literacy problem.

I play Salamanders, and since Vulkan is almost always my warlord, I tend to occupy the personal table. There's really only one rule on there that is of virtually no use to me (the counter-attack one) and one which is of limited use (the outflank one). Other than that, the table is pretty useful.

Generally speaking, I'm thoroughly unimpressed with Warlord traits, codex or not.

 Peregrine wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 conker249 wrote:
I play sisters and one of my opponents was a rules lawyer. Told me I couldn't use the command trait "inspiring presence" I just rolled for St. Celestine. Reasoning was the entry says uses "HIS" leadership. Guy was completely serious. Told him he was full of s***. I packed up off the table and went to play a friend and had fun. I dont think I was in the wrong there. Never played that guy before, Probably not going to again either. My time for wargaming is my time spent to have fun.

I wish this was a joke, but yeah, rule nazis can be a pain.

You mean " idiots who don't understand that 'his' in English is the default gender-neutral pronoun" can be a pain. That's not even RAW abuse, it's just a basic literacy problem.

Not to nit-pick but "They" is the default gender-neutral.

Eldar table tends to only work for a couple of specific armies, since I tend to use Avatar and foot soldiers they aren't very good so I go for personal (and 3 games in a row have rolled 5 which I have no tactical use for what so ever).

Warlord traits are over all not very inspiring, since they are random I get to roll a dice at beginning of a game to see if my general gives me any benefits and then his general does the same. Not so fun when his fits the glove perfectly and mine doesn't fit at all.

 DeffDred wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 conker249 wrote:
I play sisters and one of my opponents was a rules lawyer. Told me I couldn't use the command trait "inspiring presence" I just rolled for St. Celestine. Reasoning was the entry says uses "HIS" leadership. Guy was completely serious. Told him he was full of s***. I packed up off the table and went to play a friend and had fun. I dont think I was in the wrong there. Never played that guy before, Probably not going to again either. My time for wargaming is my time spent to have fun.

I wish this was a joke, but yeah, rule nazis can be a pain.

You mean " idiots who don't understand that 'his' in English is the default gender-neutral pronoun" can be a pain. That's not even RAW abuse, it's just a basic literacy problem.

Not to nit-pick but "They" is the default gender-neutral.

It's plural form, though (as is "you", but still).

Yes the Warlord Traits are not overpowering. They are nice little freebee you get at the start of the game. It’s like looking into your wallet and finding a $20 bill when you thought you only had a $10.
It is just that little extra that adds to your army not the winning Lottery Ticket.

Also when I play my “Green-Wing” I take Azrael for just for the “Courage of the Lion” to help with Leadership Checks.

I tend to find that randomly rolling the Warlord trait produces something completely useless to my Sisters army. My group tends to use the method described earlier and roll a die and pick that number off one of the three charts.

For a free roll I cant really complain. But I do feel as though they missed a trick.

If I play against an army who doesn't have a 6th edition codex, usually we just say screw the table altogether. But if I do play against a new codex who has its own, they'll usually roll from it and therefore I feel obligated to get my own trait as well. Problem is that the BRB traits are mostly worthless (Furious Charge for my Orks!; Acute Senses for my Space Wolves!).

I don't think they really ironed it out when the 6th ed rulebook came out, there are traits that are absolutely useless which you may be stuck with after a bad roll, such as the acute sense one mentioned above. I feel that they've recognised that problem and in the codex warlord table, they allow you to reroll if the warlord literally can't benefit from the trait.

I can't stand warlord traits. They're a perfect embodiment of all the extra randomness this edition.

I still use them, but if my opponents asks if we can just skip them I'm not upset in the slightest. Half the time I forget to even roll them.

The problem is the Randomness. It seems to be a theme that they are giving you things that have a major effect on the game depending on the models with the new rule, but that is balanced with a smaller chance of you getting it.

I think that grouping it like this would make it easier to end up with both sides getting at least semi-useful traits. And I do think that it is great how run of the mill HQ's get a generic trait, but characters come with their own. The part I don't like is when the characters need the trait to work properly.

The only thing I see that needs fixing is that you still end up with the right combo being incredibly powerful. So going through and changing them a bit so that its more like 'you thought you had $20, and you actually had $21'. The codex rules seem to be doing a better job with this, with all of these single use army buffs.

 DeffDred wrote:
My friends and I just roll a D6 and choose from whichever list.

Doesn't apply to me anymore because I always take Eldrad.

Always done this... we like it (but if you want to go in your codex, you roll just on that table)