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.

A thread about redundant units in the General thread got me to thinking: Why are there separate entries for these units?

Why no have a single datasheet that includes Warlocks, Conclave & Spiritseers?
You can have it allow 1-5 models per unit, All Character Warlocks.
1 Warlock per unit can be upgraded to a Spiritseer and swap their witchblade for staff.
Warlocks would still have nerfed Smite, but Spiritseers do not.

At deployment, all models in the "unit" are deployed at the same time, but are treated as separate units for the rest of the game.
You can add a rule called "Conclave" that gives a Warlock within 3" of at least 1 other Warlock some minor bonus to cast. That way you may group Warlocks together for a bonus to reflect a Conclave without having to lose the Character keyword (cuz that makes no sense)

Do the same for Warlock Skyrunners

-

Sort of like 6th edition warlock rules? Hmm. Wonky. I could take it or leave it. Some considerations

*You'd be able to field way more warlocks than the rule of 3 currently allows.

*Warlock conclaves (which are a little bit terrible currently) would no longer be able to function as a unit. So no buffing up a squad of overpriced jedi elves. Consider that this means that both psychic powers (including Fortune) and stratagems would be less useful to warlocks.

* This would kind of nerf their smite a little. While running a large conclave of warlocks is mostly a bad idea, being able to consistently get off a d6 damage smite is kind of nice. That would go away with this setup, and you'd have to run up the WC difficulty of Smite to utilize the smite power of all your 'locks. Not that you'd generally do that anyway, mind you.

*Having tons of characters is more likely to be a liability than a benefit as some rules (including mission objectives) trigger off of killing characters.

I'd be okay with your proposed rules. However, given that conclaves are overpriced for how much you give up compared to just taking individual warlocks in the official rules, I'd be tempted to instead reduce the conclave's points cost to reflect what they give up, possibly move them to the Elite slot, and keep spirit seers/warlocks their own unique HQ slots (to help with the rule of 3).

I personally prefer returning to previous editions where they did different things with Spiritseers being used for Wraith armies and Warlocks being Guardian sergeants.

But that won't happen and I like the idea of character squads.

I just don't get why there are 2 kinds of Warlocks in the codex (3 if you consider a Spiritseer is basically a Warlock+) not including Skyrunners.
Why would 2+ Warlocks that are "a unit" work differently than 2+ single Warlocks that can potentially be just as close to each other.
It makes no sense. And you have to structure special rules around them to do so.

My proposed change would make 1 single Warlock entry that gets a bonus for being near other Warlocks, but doesn't have to be near them.
It would also be at the cost of the cheaper Conclave Warlocks.

And I am fine with allowing more Warlocks via the current Beta rules. You gain no benefit as after 6-7 Warlocks, you start to not be able to cast anything but their crappy Smite.

Outside of the Conclave idea, they have separate datasheets because GW is trying to future proof stuff by bringing all "kits" and "models" in line with their own datasheet - makes it easier if they ever release a new kit for them.

 Galef wrote:
I just don't get why there are 2 kinds of Warlocks in the codex (3 if you consider a Spiritseer is basically a Warlock+) not including Skyrunners.
Why would 2+ Warlocks that are "a unit" work differently than 2+ single Warlocks that can potentially be just as close to each other.
It makes no sense. And you have to structure special rules around them to do so.

My proposed change would make 1 single Warlock entry that gets a bonus for being near other Warlocks, but doesn't have to be near them.
It would also be at the cost of the cheaper Conclave Warlocks.

And I am fine with allowing more Warlocks via the current Beta rules. You gain no benefit as after 6-7 Warlocks, you start to not be able to cast anything but their crappy Smite.

I'd be fine with this. I still kind of like the idea of a dedicated squad of warlocks that can benefit from buffs more effectively, but the conclave would need a price reduction to be viable.

Wyldhunt wrote:
I still kind of like the idea of a dedicated squad of warlocks that can benefit from buffs more effectively, but the conclave would need a price reduction to be viable.

A pretty huge price reduction. But really, how does it even make sense?
Why are 2+ warlocks that hold hands and stick together cheaper than 1 Warlock that is a loner? They are supposed to be the same thing. And why when they are grouped together do they get less total powers?
I understand it is all for game balance, but it makes no sense.

-

I never thought that warlocks were in jeopardy of being nerfed but for some inexplicable reason they were nerfed. Realistically I figured they were the most likely unit in the game to get a buff.

A warlock on a bike is inferior to a shining spear and costs a solid chunk more. I figure a 10 man conclave should be in the area of 300 on foot - 450 on bike.