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.

Just thinking out loud here...

What are some of the downsides to being able to just pick your warlord trait (or psychic powers, but that's another discussion)?

I spend all this time crafting my list, and then at the time of battle it's either a really good bonus for rolling a good warlord trait, or something completely useless.

Just being able to pick the best warlord traits at not cost is a no-go, but being able to purchase them at a cost would be ok.

I would think picking warlord traits would be ok, if both sides get to. I don't know if any are specifically OP.

Psychic powers might be too much, as you can have way more psykers than warlords.

i dont know, how would you like 90 Ork boyz outflanking ? :-p

Saying they can only do it one game out of six doesn't make it any more balanced. :p

The only real advantage to having random traits is to give Combined Arms Detachments a bonus...and I'd much rather see Traits be selectable. In theory, they're balanced against each other - in THEORY - and rolling for them is just randomness for randomness' sake. It's not helpful when you're trying to design an army. My CCS with meltaguns wants the trait that lets me outflank, not the trait that makes them relentless.

Bound list get non random WT, unbound gets random WT.

The things I'd do to get my favored warlord trait when I play with my Scions...

Yes but like others have said - at a price. Make them selectable like wargear. Some would need to be a little more controlled/limited though as being able to pick could make for some really lopsided games with the right list/trait combo.

 rhinosaur wrote:
Yes but like others have said - at a price. Make them selectable like wargear. Some would need to be a little more controlled/limited though as being able to pick could make for some really lopsided games with the right list/trait combo.

For sure, though most people (I'd hope) wouldn't be making super broken combos in a friendly game. The thing that always bugs me is that they want us to 'forge a narrative', but that's incredibly difficult when we can't even make proper themes. Nothing is more 'lacking a narrative' than bringing the WORST possible commander to lead your army.

"Oh, you can reroll your charge or run distances! Aren't I a great commander!?"

*The entire army is a gunline*

>,>

It would be nice to be able to build a themed list, and get good use out of the traits, as not many of them are actually BAD. They only seem BAD because we get them on an amry that has NO USE for them, or were not built to make potential use of it. I think we'd honestly see WAY MORE variety in games if we could pay for traits like wargear. Some units would get a LOT more table time if we could actually get traits to make them work properly.

If you could pick the reroll reserves trait for a price, there would be less sales for the aegis line + comms combo!

niv-mizzet wrote:
If you could pick the reroll reserves trait for a price, there would be less sales for the aegis line + comms combo!

It really depends. If I could get the reroll on my reserves via the Defense Line and Comms, I'd be glad to spend the points on THAT and then get a much more useful Warlord trait on top of that. The defense line is still super useful in a shooting dominant game, so it's not like it's a straight tax just for the rerolls. Besides, I doubt they are losing sales on it, since most people who intend to use one in most games already own one, or the store they play at hasa bunch (like my local store, has 6 of them for public use)

 rhinosaur wrote:
Yes but like others have said - at a price. Make them selectable like wargear. Some would need to be a little more controlled/limited though as being able to pick could make for some really lopsided games with the right list/trait combo.

I'd argue that this is a bigger problem with random warlord traits. Presumably, if one player is in a position - and of the mentality - to pick a synergistic list/trait combo, so too is the other player. Conversely, random warlord traits can lead to situations where one player lucks out by getting a good combo while the other ends up with a useless trait on an unlucky dice roll; leading to an unbalanced game.

No one would complain about Spess Mehreens getting to pick their warlord trait, because they're all kind of meh anyways. Except the stupid one that gives extra VPs. Why does that even exist anyways?

well in a way you can sort of choose your warlord trait, certain unique characters have certain traits built in...some of the traits though are just 100% worthless though

The random Warlord Traits and psychic powers are pretty much at the top of the list of things I hate about 7th edition.
They are part of planning an army and can have major repercussions for the game. It's really frustrating in terms of balance as well as fluff.

It boggles my mind how anybody could play Daemons with even your wargear being random Oo. It would drive me mad.

In-game randomness is fine. Like the warp dice and the chaos table (although the non random blood tithe is heaps better ofc).
I REALLY hope GW change that system. Until they do, I for one do not even consider warlord traits a thing. I don't even use psykers unless I want the primaris, or the table only has three powers like with chaos...and even then it bothers me.
It's a real shame imho and it would add a huge layer of strategy to the game. More so, seeing as how most of them are on equal footing. Some are better than others, but overall they're pretty good.
That's assuming ofc that you get the one that suits your playstyle and army.

They might have to tweak them a little bit, but atm I don't really see why you can't just pick one. Psychic Powers are a different matter. They'd almost need to be redesigned to some degree on top of changing how you get them.
They should really be more uniform, like, all should have one big 3 charge power and only one and x 2 charge powers...that kinda thing.

Roknar wrote:
It boggles my mind how anybody could play Daemons with even your wargear being random Oo. It would drive me mad.

I play daemons specifically because its so random. That said, there are "primaris" wargear selections that mitigate this and on smaller guys like heralds, it's usually a better idea anyway.


if special characters didn't exist, there wouldn't be a problem with picking warlord traits because both players could take whatever they want and it would be relatively balanced because neither player had payed for a warlord trait. the problem is that special characters have built in warlord traits, so they have to be accounted for like USRs or special wargear. I also think that some warlord traits are too powerful. there are definitely warlord traits that would get picked all the time and others that would never be seen because they suck. Alternatively, there is also the thing where some traits look great on paper, but actually are just really situational.

Codex specific warlord traits would be easy to assign point values to because you would only have to balance those against a small pool of units. SM warlord traits especially are easy in my mind. the one that grants extra VP for slay the warlord should cost like 20-30 points, and the other five options exist in the 10-15 point range.

But then the BRB warlord traits would get ridiculous. What may be worth 50 points to a CSM warlord may be absolute garbage to a Tau player. And how many points are we going to spend on warlord traits now? 40-50 point warlord traits (there are some, I'm sure) being slapped onto every vanilla captain would push the size of games up even further and make HQ + troop taxes even less appealing for some armies.i

I think this is a cool idea, but it would need a lot of work to not fill everything with more cheese.

I think that has more to do with competitive vs friendly games.
In a friendly environment the traits are fairly well balanced as far as I'm concerned. There are always several different traits that I would like to take. That's not to say there aren't some worthless ones.
But if i had to play to win, things like the infiltrate one would gain much more weight.

They might be able to do something like in cities of death or planet strike... where you'd get like command points and can get several small ones or one bigger trait. It would also tie all the different games together in that manner. Ofc they'd have to update the actual traits for that but yea
Heck that would even allow people to take like support hqs that increase the amount of command points you have, if GW wanted to sell more characters.
They keep adding new stratagems, but so far I have never been able to use any. I don't know how balanced they are but I haven't heard anybody complain about them so far? So why not just use them or special core game ones.

Who'd not infiltrate 3 units every game for free?

It would be easier if you could pay for having the choice of choosing yout Warlord Trait.

ie, pay 40 points and your warlord may choose his trait.

there wouldn't be the problem to give the right cost to each trait, no one could complaint about GW giving unbalanced costs.

you pay, and choose the trait that you think may be the more usefull for your army.

you don't pay, and go for random choice.

 koooaei wrote:
Who'd not infiltrate 3 units every game for free?

This.

If you allow choosing you might as well just add 'master of strategy' to every warlord ever and skip the actual choosing part.

At least for me that's not true, but I'm more on the fluffy side of things.

if given the option to choose for 40 pts I would get infiltrate every single time and infiltrate 90 orks every single time.

I think the fact there's a lot of totally broken warlord traits, vs. ones that are mediocre even when they are relevant, is a bigger issue than random warlord traits.

I like the concept, hate the execution.

The main reason in see for random psychic powers and warlord traits is so you CAN'T build your army with those in mind. They are bonuses that are hopefully helpful, but ultimately unreliable. If you allow people to chose (as my group did) what about the guys who get to roll extra? There are a lot of SERIOUS repercussions when you allow people to select their traits, and none of them are actually that good.

If you simply look at the warlord traits (and psycker powers) as additional rules that you don't pay much for, you'll begin to see that that is what they are. Psyckers cost points, but the points are really for the primaris powers and psychic defense, not for what the random powers they get a chance for. You could very easily make a psychic army where you know exactly what powers you will have, they will all be primaris, same with warlord traits. If you want to guarantee a trait, go with a named character. The only reason people don't is because they feel that some other traits are better, and they are, and that is exactly why you don't get to chose. The game is entirely based in chance, when you generate warlord traits, you are gambling. You're guaranteed to get something, but you hope to get the best.

 koooaei wrote:
Who'd not infiltrate 3 units every game for free?

Me! I'd rather outflank them. Or give my CCS preferred enemy if it's decked out with plasma. Or maybe give them a lascannon and Master of Ordinance and make them have relentless, just for a laugh...

I'd rather have the Warlord Traits looked over and touched up for balance purposes, sure. But given the choice between being able to have a coherent battle plan - because some traits can SERIOUSLY alter your battle plan - or letting a die decide whether I or my opponent gets something useless while the other one gets something awesome, I know what I'd pick. The emphasis should be on player choice, with randomness as a spice.

You're guaranteed to get something, but you hope to get the best.

Except that 'something' might be relentless in a squad without heavy weapons, or a bonus for being in ruins on a table without them. The fact that there's a disparity in power between traits isn't balanced by rolling for them; it just means that one player might get a leg up on the other for no reason. People still hope to see the same traits they'd get if they picked them.

That's the thing. depending on the traits you might be at a serious disadvantage right from the start for no other reason than him getting lucky on the traits you not...that's not exactly what I'd call fun.

Or you could just get rid of warlord traits. Quite a few of them are so situational (stealth: ruins, for instance) that applying a cost to them is extremely difficult.

Roll 1 die, and THEN pick the table you choose your Warlord Trait from the BRB. Slightly better chance of getting something useful for both players.

The rules are the rules. Unfortunate but true.

That being said, there is no game design reason to roll on warlord traits or psychic powers. That gak is all random for randomnesses sake.

It doesn't serve any purpose for balancing because you could still have any of them. It removes tactical decisions while adding an unnecessary level of complication.

 kronk wrote:
Roll 1 die, and THEN pick the table you choose your Warlord Trait from the BRB. Slightly better chance of getting something useful for both players.

If they insist on keeping the random dickery then I would def prefer this..it would still work with the warlord trait re-rolls too

What would you do for spec characters that have already had their auto warlord trait considered in their points cost?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Would they get a points reduction?