The Warp Forge wrote:

Aash wrote:
As for the rules themselves, I don't think you'll have much luck submitting them to GW, I have a number of issues with them.

Regarding the Strategems, I dislike anything that ignores special rules other units have. It isn't good rules-writing IMHO. You can have rules that do similar things and then make rules for how they interact, but to remove another unit's special ability isn't likely to fly with most players I would expect. I doubt you would enjoy playing against an army that could suddenly tell you that your special guy can't do his special thing. The terror Strike Strategem doesn't make much sense against units that can ignore Morale from a fluff standpoint - Necrons, Tyranids etc.

Also, how does Terror Strike interact with Insane Bravery? Just looks like you've come up with a Strategem that causes you and your opponent to both lose 2CP and not achieve anything else.

For the first Strategem it starts off talking about the start of the battle round, but then says the ability lasts until the end of the turn, so it will only ever apply for whichever player got turn one. Maybe needs rewording.

Regarding the starts, I fully agree with the use of singular rules to cancel others is bad rules writing. it's a hard counter that people causes frustration to players within a game. Unfortunately the game is so ingrained upon hard counters alongside power creep, that another one adding to the pile isn't going to hurt the frustration of players anymore than what already exists and the player base at large seems to be accepting of this. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel of the game, only trying to make the Legion that I hold most dear to me in lore and game worth a damn.

a fat guy wrote:It does a LOT, which may be your intention (if you want the Night Lords to have their own codex like the Thousand Sons and Death Guard). If so, you'd need to add in at least an additional special character and one primarch equivalent. You'd also have to make up a few new units too, which is a tonne more work (though you could just rework the old legion artefacts from the traitor legions supplement). If not, this does way too much. Rather than amping up the ability to cause fear, I'd suggest toning the fear factor down and giving them something else instead of just "scary rules". Ideally they'd have some minor fear effect and the Alpha Legion trait, because it suits them a lot more. Alpha Legion isn't anywhere near as basic stealthwise as the Night Lords, they're more of an "already beside you" kind of Legion. GW definitely messed that one up.

I wasn't trying to reinvent the wheel and create a standalone codex. That I feel would be far too much effort for GW to make new units, wargear, etc for our legion, hence why I'm trying to go as minimalist as possible with a WD-style supplement because it's a bit more realistic to get that done, than GW creating a whole new codex for us.

Really it isn't possible to give them rules to accurately represent them on the tabletop now, since we know what their "real rules" should be like, based on the Horus Heresy Massacre book, and that the corpse trophies of your buddies might actually coax you into attacking the enemy more than it acts as a deterrent (which I don't think has ever been represented in rules for them). To represent this, you could give them a stratagem that forces a unit within X inches to take some kind of fear test. And if they pass it, rather than running away, they are forced to charge because they're so angry at seeing their buddies strewn up or something along those lines. But fitting a rule that complex/wordy into one of those small legion trait boxes would be difficult, and GW really don't care about the traitor legions in 40K outside of the cult legions and Black Legion.

It's a thought, but then again regarding external balance, why would you want that? It's a very hard one to really think about, but maybe more of a debuff to an enemy unit would be suited better.

Also not to dissuade your efforts, but another thing to consider if you want morale shenanigans with the Night Lords, are forgeworld and daemon units. Furies are still fluffy (Raptors enslave them) and they kill additional units that Grim Resolve can't stop. Theres also a Slaanesh artefact that forces a leadership test on 3D6, which, if failed, prevents the model from doing anything at all (take that OP HQ's!), and the Butcher Cannon Array from a Leviathan Dreadnought can tank leadership values even further. Food for thought if you want to also figure out a way to make the current rules work.

I already know of these things. I frequently use a Double Butcher Leviathan. What I've tried to do is make us stand more on our own two feet rather than leaning on the one-trick pony with Daemon Soup. Even in the 41st Millennium Night lords still feel a massive distrust of Daemons, and although they are fractured and some have already Ascended to Daemonhood, the Legion at large still don't want to be associated with them and followers of them (Believing that they are just puppets no more than Loyalists serving The Emperor).

Wyldhunt wrote:First of all, thanks for taking the time to put this together. There's a lot of flavor to these rules, and your passion for them shines through.

That said, I do have some concerns, most of which have already been mentioned by others.


* I don't know how it compares to space marine warlord traits, but Murderous Reputation is straight up better than the eldar equivalents (which only do 1 mortal wound).

Thanks! I'm unsure but when speaking to Tournament players who play multiple armies of Imperium, Xeno and Chaos, they saw the trait as just fine.

* Terror Strike seems too wordy, situationally fluff-breaking (how are you bypassing tyranid synapse?), and a bit annoying to play against when it does matter. As an alternative, maybe just make it a strat you use at the start of the Morale phase that prevents the Insane Bravery strat from being used? Or a targeted strat that forces the enemy to roll an extra die for morale and take the highest of the dice rolled? Or any number of other things. I realize morale is a wonky mechanic this edition and that it's annoying when your army's gimmick is just ignored by your opponent, but your opponent is theoretically investing something (points baked into the unit, CP for strats, chapter tactic choices, etc.) to mitigate your morale shenanigans.

When it comes to lore it's a hard one because there will always be parts of the game that break the lore. Recently I played aginst daemons and managed to get -11 on a unit of 30 Bloodletter just by unsing a double Butcher Levi Dread, that was also Alpha Legion. Do Daemons even have the notion of running away in fear? I don't think so. In DoWII, the Blood Ravens find a poison of sorts to disrupt the Synapse to isolate the Tyrant (IIRC) and that took a number of months to do. Now Since Blood Ravens are considered Cannon with a Gabriel Angelos Model with DoWIII representations, this to me tells me that this is now established cannon and so the Synapse can be bypassed. I would think with the aid of The Warp and an unrestricted Dark Mechanicum, they could find a way.

The issue is that people underestimate how much a trait cements an army. They might have sunken their resources into trying to negate my morale but this could be said in vice versa. Ultimately this just leads to real sour tastes in someone mouth. What's the incentive to play against Dark Angels unless I'm really hardcore into the lore, or because my opponent is a really close friend? Why should I waste my time into playing a game that I'm already on a uphill battle for, when my opponent has invested little to no effort in negating my main playstyle and then also gets to play with their toys whilst i'm stuck relying on bubble auras and the sheer raw power of units? At that point I would just rather concede that game and then choose to play someone else with a more fun list.

* We Have Come for You is also way too wordy. You could consolidate or ditch those last several sentences to shrink it up. Also, this is basically that one Blood Angel's strat plus an extra effect (and possibly cheaper than the BA strat too?) Instead of one long strat that's like a different strat but better, why not split this up into two different strats? Make one an exact duplicate of the BA 3d6" charge strat, and let the other handle the leadership stuff.

Noted. I will reword it to be simpler.

* Grizzly Visage is probably okay where it's at, but it feels a bit wonky. For one thing, getting a bunch of models to flee mid-fight-phase for "free" is potentially a feelbadsy rule. Consider doing something more conventional with this. Maybe it's a straight up leadership debuff aura like the Mask of Secrets. Maybe it causes an enemy to stand there screaming in outrage forcing them to swing last (like a Vexator mask). Maybe it does more or less the same thing you have it doing now but in the Morale phase to make it simpler to resolve.

Unfortunately the game is ingrained on hard counters and power creep which leave a lot of "feelbadsy" experiences. That tau Sept which Overwatches on a 5+ with their combined fire, is a particular rule that makes leaves a bad experience. Having units with -2/-3 to Hit is also not a fun experience. Castellans before the nerf were feelbadsy. Vindicare Assassins to me personally have feelbadsy experiances. I'm not trying to make a Supplement to make them fair and reflective of their fluff. I'm making a supplement that makes them viable and reflective of their fluff. I'm not trying to break the game with this but when theirs already so many negative aspects in the game, you kinda just have to go with the flow until they reboot the rule set again. It is truly unfortunate but its the game we live in.

* Your "scary rules" have several different range bands, and that seems both strange and less easy to remember. One ability is a 10" aura. Another has an 8" range. Another has a range that can vary situationally. Also, GW convention is to make most ranges an increment of 3". So 6" or 9" might be preferable to 8" or 10".

The reason for this is because the 9" Band doesn't really offer anything unless you get into combat, and that's where the heart of the issue lies. This is the rock/paper/scissors environment we live in. I would never have wanted to create this but this is what we have to make do with. I do have 6" range bands so I feel this the halfway point of compromise.

* The CP part of Terror Tactics seems fiddly. It's annoying if your once per game roll doesn't go off, and it's usually not that big of a deal when it was. If you want to indicate that you're disrupting the chain of command, how about making a strat that lets you spend XCP when you kill a character in the Fight phase to force your opponent to lose YCP? It happens automatically and can be used multiple times (at a cost) so that it's more likely to make a difference. Losing 1CP isn't that huge a loss (usually), but having 3 or 3d3 CP taken away over the course of the game? that's a big deal.

I'm gonna try and reintegrate this somewhere else or make the roll harder, like a roll of a 6.


Thanks to all the feedback, I've given it some time to think about. The reason why it contained a lot in was because I was discussing these with Tournament gamers who play frequently and they gave me the feedback on what I could do to make them Viable. I'm gonna make a separate post here to show the following changes for further feedback.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Following changes have been added.

- Got rid of a few things to replace with Codex-Issue stuff.

-Reworded a few things to be simpler.

 Togusa wrote:

 The Warp Forge wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
[spoiler]

 The Warp Forge wrote:

Aash wrote:
As for the rules themselves, I don't think you'll have much luck submitting them to GW, I have a number of issues with them.

Regarding the Strategems, I dislike anything that ignores special rules other units have. It isn't good rules-writing IMHO. You can have rules that do similar things and then make rules for how they interact, but to remove another unit's special ability isn't likely to fly with most players I would expect. I doubt you would enjoy playing against an army that could suddenly tell you that your special guy can't do his special thing. The terror Strike Strategem doesn't make much sense against units that can ignore Morale from a fluff standpoint - Necrons, Tyranids etc.

Also, how does Terror Strike interact with Insane Bravery? Just looks like you've come up with a Strategem that causes you and your opponent to both lose 2CP and not achieve anything else.

For the first Strategem it starts off talking about the start of the battle round, but then says the ability lasts until the end of the turn, so it will only ever apply for whichever player got turn one. Maybe needs rewording.

Regarding the starts, I fully agree with the use of singular rules to cancel others is bad rules writing. it's a hard counter that people causes frustration to players within a game. Unfortunately the game is so ingrained upon hard counters alongside power creep, that another one adding to the pile isn't going to hurt the frustration of players anymore than what already exists and the player base at large seems to be accepting of this. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel of the game, only trying to make the Legion that I hold most dear to me in lore and game worth a damn.

a fat guy wrote:It does a LOT, which may be your intention (if you want the Night Lords to have their own codex like the Thousand Sons and Death Guard). If so, you'd need to add in at least an additional special character and one primarch equivalent. You'd also have to make up a few new units too, which is a tonne more work (though you could just rework the old legion artefacts from the traitor legions supplement). If not, this does way too much. Rather than amping up the ability to cause fear, I'd suggest toning the fear factor down and giving them something else instead of just "scary rules". Ideally they'd have some minor fear effect and the Alpha Legion trait, because it suits them a lot more. Alpha Legion isn't anywhere near as basic stealthwise as the Night Lords, they're more of an "already beside you" kind of Legion. GW definitely messed that one up.

I wasn't trying to reinvent the wheel and create a standalone codex. That I feel would be far too much effort for GW to make new units, wargear, etc for our legion, hence why I'm trying to go as minimalist as possible with a WD-style supplement because it's a bit more realistic to get that done, than GW creating a whole new codex for us.

Really it isn't possible to give them rules to accurately represent them on the tabletop now, since we know what their "real rules" should be like, based on the Horus Heresy Massacre book, and that the corpse trophies of your buddies might actually coax you into attacking the enemy more than it acts as a deterrent (which I don't think has ever been represented in rules for them). To represent this, you could give them a stratagem that forces a unit within X inches to take some kind of fear test. And if they pass it, rather than running away, they are forced to charge because they're so angry at seeing their buddies strewn up or something along those lines. But fitting a rule that complex/wordy into one of those small legion trait boxes would be difficult, and GW really don't care about the traitor legions in 40K outside of the cult legions and Black Legion.

It's a thought, but then again regarding external balance, why would you want that? It's a very hard one to really think about, but maybe more of a debuff to an enemy unit would be suited better.

Also not to dissuade your efforts, but another thing to consider if you want morale shenanigans with the Night Lords, are forgeworld and daemon units. Furies are still fluffy (Raptors enslave them) and they kill additional units that Grim Resolve can't stop. Theres also a Slaanesh artefact that forces a leadership test on 3D6, which, if failed, prevents the model from doing anything at all (take that OP HQ's!), and the Butcher Cannon Array from a Leviathan Dreadnought can tank leadership values even further. Food for thought if you want to also figure out a way to make the current rules work.

I already know of these things. I frequently use a Double Butcher Leviathan. What I've tried to do is make us stand more on our own two feet rather than leaning on the one-trick pony with Daemon Soup. Even in the 41st Millennium Night lords still feel a massive distrust of Daemons, and although they are fractured and some have already Ascended to Daemonhood, the Legion at large still don't want to be associated with them and followers of them (Believing that they are just puppets no more than Loyalists serving The Emperor).

Wyldhunt wrote:First of all, thanks for taking the time to put this together. There's a lot of flavor to these rules, and your passion for them shines through.

That said, I do have some concerns, most of which have already been mentioned by others.


* I don't know how it compares to space marine warlord traits, but Murderous Reputation is straight up better than the eldar equivalents (which only do 1 mortal wound).

Thanks! I'm unsure but when speaking to Tournament players who play multiple armies of Imperium, Xeno and Chaos, they saw the trait as just fine.

* Terror Strike seems too wordy, situationally fluff-breaking (how are you bypassing tyranid synapse?), and a bit annoying to play against when it does matter. As an alternative, maybe just make it a strat you use at the start of the Morale phase that prevents the Insane Bravery strat from being used? Or a targeted strat that forces the enemy to roll an extra die for morale and take the highest of the dice rolled? Or any number of other things. I realize morale is a wonky mechanic this edition and that it's annoying when your army's gimmick is just ignored by your opponent, but your opponent is theoretically investing something (points baked into the unit, CP for strats, chapter tactic choices, etc.) to mitigate your morale shenanigans.

When it comes to lore it's a hard one because there will always be parts of the game that break the lore. Recently I played aginst daemons and managed to get -11 on a unit of 30 Bloodletter just by unsing a double Butcher Levi Dread, that was also Alpha Legion. Do Daemons even have the notion of running away in fear? I don't think so. In DoWII, the Blood Ravens find a poison of sorts to disrupt the Synapse to isolate the Tyrant (IIRC) and that took a number of months to do. Now Since Blood Ravens are considered Cannon with a Gabriel Angelos Model with DoWIII representations, this to me tells me that this is now established cannon and so the Synapse can be bypassed. I would think with the aid of The Warp and an unrestricted Dark Mechanicum, they could find a way.

The issue is that people underestimate how much a trait cements an army. They might have sunken their resources into trying to negate my morale but this could be said in vice versa. Ultimately this just leads to real sour tastes in someone mouth. What's the incentive to play against Dark Angels unless I'm really hardcore into the lore, or because my opponent is a really close friend? Why should I waste my time into playing a game that I'm already on a uphill battle for, when my opponent has invested little to no effort in negating my main playstyle and then also gets to play with their toys whilst i'm stuck relying on bubble auras and the sheer raw power of units? At that point I would just rather concede that game and then choose to play someone else with a more fun list.

* We Have Come for You is also way too wordy. You could consolidate or ditch those last several sentences to shrink it up. Also, this is basically that one Blood Angel's strat plus an extra effect (and possibly cheaper than the BA strat too?) Instead of one long strat that's like a different strat but better, why not split this up into two different strats? Make one an exact duplicate of the BA 3d6" charge strat, and let the other handle the leadership stuff.

Noted. I will reword it to be simpler.

* Grizzly Visage is probably okay where it's at, but it feels a bit wonky. For one thing, getting a bunch of models to flee mid-fight-phase for "free" is potentially a feelbadsy rule. Consider doing something more conventional with this. Maybe it's a straight up leadership debuff aura like the Mask of Secrets. Maybe it causes an enemy to stand there screaming in outrage forcing them to swing last (like a Vexator mask). Maybe it does more or less the same thing you have it doing now but in the Morale phase to make it simpler to resolve.

Unfortunately the game is ingrained on hard counters and power creep which leave a lot of "feelbadsy" experiences. That tau Sept which Overwatches on a 5+ with their combined fire, is a particular rule that makes leaves a bad experience. Having units with -2/-3 to Hit is also not a fun experience. Castellans before the nerf were feelbadsy. Vindicare Assassins to me personally have feelbadsy experiences. I'm not trying to make a Supplement to make them fair and reflective of their fluff. I'm making a supplement that makes them viable and reflective of their fluff. I'm not trying to break the game with this but when theirs already so many negative aspects in the game, you kinda just have to go with the flow until they reboot the rule set again. It is truly unfortunate but its the game we live in.

* Your "scary rules" have several different range bands, and that seems both strange and less easy to remember. One ability is a 10" aura. Another has an 8" range. Another has a range that can vary situationally. Also, GW convention is to make most ranges an increment of 3". So 6" or 9" might be preferable to 8" or 10".

The reason for this is because the 9" Band doesn't really offer anything unless you get into combat, and that's where the heart of the issue lies. This is the rock/paper/scissors environment we live in. I would never have wanted to create this but this is what we have to make do with. I do have 6" range bands so I feel this the halfway point of compromise.

* The CP part of Terror Tactics seems fiddly. It's annoying if your once per game roll doesn't go off, and it's usually not that big of a deal when it was. If you want to indicate that you're disrupting the chain of command, how about making a strat that lets you spend XCP when you kill a character in the Fight phase to force your opponent to lose YCP? It happens automatically and can be used multiple times (at a cost) so that it's more likely to make a difference. Losing 1CP isn't that huge a loss (usually), but having 3 or 3d3 CP taken away over the course of the game? that's a big deal.

I'm gonna try and reintegrate this somewhere else or make the roll harder, like a roll of a 6.


Thanks to all the feedback, I've given it some time to think about. The reason why it contained a lot in was because I was discussing these with Tournament gamers who play frequently and they gave me the feedback on what I could do to make them Viable. I'm gonna make a separate post here to show the following changes for further feedback.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Following changes have been added.

- Got rid of a few things to replace with Codex-Issue stuff.

-Reworded a few things to be simpler.

10 inches is way too far for an aura ability such as this. It should be about 6 inches and should cap at -4, otherwise it will be beyond broken.

 The Warp Forge wrote:
[spoiler]

 Togusa wrote:

 The Warp Forge wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
[spoiler]

 The Warp Forge wrote:

Aash wrote:
As for the rules themselves, I don't think you'll have much luck submitting them to GW, I have a number of issues with them.

Regarding the Strategems, I dislike anything that ignores special rules other units have. It isn't good rules-writing IMHO. You can have rules that do similar things and then make rules for how they interact, but to remove another unit's special ability isn't likely to fly with most players I would expect. I doubt you would enjoy playing against an army that could suddenly tell you that your special guy can't do his special thing. The terror Strike Strategem doesn't make much sense against units that can ignore Morale from a fluff standpoint - Necrons, Tyranids etc.

Also, how does Terror Strike interact with Insane Bravery? Just looks like you've come up with a Strategem that causes you and your opponent to both lose 2CP and not achieve anything else.

For the first Strategem it starts off talking about the start of the battle round, but then says the ability lasts until the end of the turn, so it will only ever apply for whichever player got turn one. Maybe needs rewording.

Regarding the starts, I fully agree with the use of singular rules to cancel others is bad rules writing. it's a hard counter that people causes frustration to players within a game. Unfortunately the game is so ingrained upon hard counters alongside power creep, that another one adding to the pile isn't going to hurt the frustration of players anymore than what already exists and the player base at large seems to be accepting of this. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel of the game, only trying to make the Legion that I hold most dear to me in lore and game worth a damn.

a fat guy wrote:It does a LOT, which may be your intention (if you want the Night Lords to have their own codex like the Thousand Sons and Death Guard). If so, you'd need to add in at least an additional special character and one primarch equivalent. You'd also have to make up a few new units too, which is a tonne more work (though you could just rework the old legion artefacts from the traitor legions supplement). If not, this does way too much. Rather than amping up the ability to cause fear, I'd suggest toning the fear factor down and giving them something else instead of just "scary rules". Ideally they'd have some minor fear effect and the Alpha Legion trait, because it suits them a lot more. Alpha Legion isn't anywhere near as basic stealthwise as the Night Lords, they're more of an "already beside you" kind of Legion. GW definitely messed that one up.

I wasn't trying to reinvent the wheel and create a standalone codex. That I feel would be far too much effort for GW to make new units, wargear, etc for our legion, hence why I'm trying to go as minimalist as possible with a WD-style supplement because it's a bit more realistic to get that done, than GW creating a whole new codex for us.

Really it isn't possible to give them rules to accurately represent them on the tabletop now, since we know what their "real rules" should be like, based on the Horus Heresy Massacre book, and that the corpse trophies of your buddies might actually coax you into attacking the enemy more than it acts as a deterrent (which I don't think has ever been represented in rules for them). To represent this, you could give them a stratagem that forces a unit within X inches to take some kind of fear test. And if they pass it, rather than running away, they are forced to charge because they're so angry at seeing their buddies strewn up or something along those lines. But fitting a rule that complex/wordy into one of those small legion trait boxes would be difficult, and GW really don't care about the traitor legions in 40K outside of the cult legions and Black Legion.

It's a thought, but then again regarding external balance, why would you want that? It's a very hard one to really think about, but maybe more of a debuff to an enemy unit would be suited better.

Also not to dissuade your efforts, but another thing to consider if you want morale shenanigans with the Night Lords, are forgeworld and daemon units. Furies are still fluffy (Raptors enslave them) and they kill additional units that Grim Resolve can't stop. Theres also a Slaanesh artefact that forces a leadership test on 3D6, which, if failed, prevents the model from doing anything at all (take that OP HQ's!), and the Butcher Cannon Array from a Leviathan Dreadnought can tank leadership values even further. Food for thought if you want to also figure out a way to make the current rules work.

I already know of these things. I frequently use a Double Butcher Leviathan. What I've tried to do is make us stand more on our own two feet rather than leaning on the one-trick pony with Daemon Soup. Even in the 41st Millennium Night lords still feel a massive distrust of Daemons, and although they are fractured and some have already Ascended to Daemonhood, the Legion at large still don't want to be associated with them and followers of them (Believing that they are just puppets no more than Loyalists serving The Emperor).

Wyldhunt wrote:First of all, thanks for taking the time to put this together. There's a lot of flavor to these rules, and your passion for them shines through.

That said, I do have some concerns, most of which have already been mentioned by others.


* I don't know how it compares to space marine warlord traits, but Murderous Reputation is straight up better than the eldar equivalents (which only do 1 mortal wound).

Thanks! I'm unsure but when speaking to Tournament players who play multiple armies of Imperium, Xeno and Chaos, they saw the trait as just fine.

* Terror Strike seems too wordy, situationally fluff-breaking (how are you bypassing tyranid synapse?), and a bit annoying to play against when it does matter. As an alternative, maybe just make it a strat you use at the start of the Morale phase that prevents the Insane Bravery strat from being used? Or a targeted strat that forces the enemy to roll an extra die for morale and take the highest of the dice rolled? Or any number of other things. I realize morale is a wonky mechanic this edition and that it's annoying when your army's gimmick is just ignored by your opponent, but your opponent is theoretically investing something (points baked into the unit, CP for strats, chapter tactic choices, etc.) to mitigate your morale shenanigans.

When it comes to lore it's a hard one because there will always be parts of the game that break the lore. Recently I played aginst daemons and managed to get -11 on a unit of 30 Bloodletter just by unsing a double Butcher Levi Dread, that was also Alpha Legion. Do Daemons even have the notion of running away in fear? I don't think so. In DoWII, the Blood Ravens find a poison of sorts to disrupt the Synapse to isolate the Tyrant (IIRC) and that took a number of months to do. Now Since Blood Ravens are considered Cannon with a Gabriel Angelos Model with DoWIII representations, this to me tells me that this is now established cannon and so the Synapse can be bypassed. I would think with the aid of The Warp and an unrestricted Dark Mechanicum, they could find a way.

The issue is that people underestimate how much a trait cements an army. They might have sunken their resources into trying to negate my morale but this could be said in vice versa. Ultimately this just leads to real sour tastes in someone mouth. What's the incentive to play against Dark Angels unless I'm really hardcore into the lore, or because my opponent is a really close friend? Why should I waste my time into playing a game that I'm already on a uphill battle for, when my opponent has invested little to no effort in negating my main playstyle and then also gets to play with their toys whilst i'm stuck relying on bubble auras and the sheer raw power of units? At that point I would just rather concede that game and then choose to play someone else with a more fun list.

* We Have Come for You is also way too wordy. You could consolidate or ditch those last several sentences to shrink it up. Also, this is basically that one Blood Angel's strat plus an extra effect (and possibly cheaper than the BA strat too?) Instead of one long strat that's like a different strat but better, why not split this up into two different strats? Make one an exact duplicate of the BA 3d6" charge strat, and let the other handle the leadership stuff.

Noted. I will reword it to be simpler.

* Grizzly Visage is probably okay where it's at, but it feels a bit wonky. For one thing, getting a bunch of models to flee mid-fight-phase for "free" is potentially a feelbadsy rule. Consider doing something more conventional with this. Maybe it's a straight up leadership debuff aura like the Mask of Secrets. Maybe it causes an enemy to stand there screaming in outrage forcing them to swing last (like a Vexator mask). Maybe it does more or less the same thing you have it doing now but in the Morale phase to make it simpler to resolve.

Unfortunately the game is ingrained on hard counters and power creep which leave a lot of "feelbadsy" experiences. That tau Sept which Overwatches on a 5+ with their combined fire, is a particular rule that makes leaves a bad experience. Having units with -2/-3 to Hit is also not a fun experience. Castellans before the nerf were feelbadsy. Vindicare Assassins to me personally have feelbadsy experiences. I'm not trying to make a Supplement to make them fair and reflective of their fluff. I'm making a supplement that makes them viable and reflective of their fluff. I'm not trying to break the game with this but when theirs already so many negative aspects in the game, you kinda just have to go with the flow until they reboot the rule set again. It is truly unfortunate but its the game we live in.

* Your "scary rules" have several different range bands, and that seems both strange and less easy to remember. One ability is a 10" aura. Another has an 8" range. Another has a range that can vary situationally. Also, GW convention is to make most ranges an increment of 3". So 6" or 9" might be preferable to 8" or 10".

The reason for this is because the 9" Band doesn't really offer anything unless you get into combat, and that's where the heart of the issue lies. This is the rock/paper/scissors environment we live in. I would never have wanted to create this but this is what we have to make do with. I do have 6" range bands so I feel this the halfway point of compromise.

* The CP part of Terror Tactics seems fiddly. It's annoying if your once per game roll doesn't go off, and it's usually not that big of a deal when it was. If you want to indicate that you're disrupting the chain of command, how about making a strat that lets you spend XCP when you kill a character in the Fight phase to force your opponent to lose YCP? It happens automatically and can be used multiple times (at a cost) so that it's more likely to make a difference. Losing 1CP isn't that huge a loss (usually), but having 3 or 3d3 CP taken away over the course of the game? that's a big deal.

I'm gonna try and reintegrate this somewhere else or make the roll harder, like a roll of a 6.


Thanks to all the feedback, I've given it some time to think about. The reason why it contained a lot in was because I was discussing these with Tournament gamers who play frequently and they gave me the feedback on what I could do to make them Viable. I'm gonna make a separate post here to show the following changes for further feedback.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Following changes have been added.

- Got rid of a few things to replace with Codex-Issue stuff.

-Reworded a few things to be simpler.

10 inches is way too far for an aura ability such as this. It should be about 6 inches and should cap at -4, otherwise it will be beyond broken.

Fall back and charge + LD Debuff +Mortal wounds/CP loss is so broken it's not even funny.

A better idea might be to keep the LD Debuff (capped at -4 within 6") and add "A unit with this tactic may also reroll failed charge rolls" making it a lot easier to do what NL do, which is charge the field with Chainswords, Lightning Claws and the like.

I also think they need a strat that allows them to DS within 7 inches of a target and deny overwatch when doing so. 2-3 CP.