Latest posts for the thread "Codex: Protoss"

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Hey guys, I got a wild hair so I started writing a Protoss codex. Here is the troops and I'll be adding more to this but, I just wanted to know what you thought, hope you like.

Updates are in yellow.

TROOPS

Dragoon.......50 pts

WS BS S F S R
1 4 5 10 10 10

Type: Vehicle (Walker)
Composition: 1-3 Dragoons
Wargear: Photon Cannon, Plasma Shield
Special rules: Protoss Armored Infantry
Options:
May take
Singularity Charge........25 pts

Singlarity Charge: Increase the max range of the Dragoon's weapon to 30 inches.
Photon Cannon:
Range Strength AP Type
24" 6 3 Heavy 1
Protoss Armored Infantry: Dragoons are counted as scoring troops for the purposes of objectives.
Plasma Shield: Plasma shield confers a 5+ invulnerable.

Zealot.......25 pts per model

WS BS S T W I A LD Sv
5 0 4 4 1 3 2 8 3+

Type: Infantry

Composition: 5-10 Zealots

Wargear: Psi Blades, Plasma Shield
Special Rules: Furious Charge, Fearless

Options:
The Tribe may take
Leg Enhancements.....5 pts per model

Psi Blades: Psi Blades are rending and count as a set of two close combat weapons.
Leg Enhancements: Zealots have the fleet universal special rule.
Plasma Shield: Plasma shield grants the Feel no Pain universal special rule.

Sentry.....30 ptsper model

WS BS S T W I A LD Sv
3 4 3 3 1 2 1 8 6+

Type: Infantry
Composition: 1-3 Sentries
Wargear: Disruption Beam, Plasma Shield
Special rules:, Psyker
Options:
the tribe may take the following phychic powers:
Force Field........15 pts per model
Guardian Shield....30 pts per model

Disruption Beam:
Range Strength AP Type
24" 3 - Assault 3
Force Field: Place a large blast marker anywhare within 24" of the Sentry.
The blast marker must be scattered. The area under the marker becomes impassible terrain.
All units caught under the blast marker are moved the minimium distants to clear the blast.
Guardian Shield: All Protoss units is within 12 inches recieve a 3+ cover save.

Codex: Protoss

Cryonicleech — GMT

Why not make Dragoons T5 with 2 wounds? Why are Zeaots WS 6? Why do they have two wounds? They shouldn't have the option for a 12" assault, much less 12" movements. 24 Inch Assault?

Also, Sentries are WAY undercosted. Lascannons, Autocannons, Heavy Bolters, and the like are all S3? That's.... ridiculous.

Overall, most of this stuff is OP and needs some serious toning down.

Codex: Protoss

motyak — GMT

Guardian shield makes your scoring dragoons invulnerable to shooting. That's just a flat out no. No, no, no. Not allowed.

Re:Codex: Protoss

CthuluIsSpy — GMT

Hells no to all of these.

Here's my take

Elite

Dragoon = 50-60pts

Unit composition = 1-3 models

Monstrous Creature

WS1 BS4 S5 T5 W2 I2 A1 2+ sv

Wargear - Phase Disruptor, plasma shielding

Special Rules - MTC, fearless, relentless

Phase Disrupter - 24" Range, S6 AP3 Heavy 1

Plasma Shielding - 4+ invul save

Upgrades =
Singularity Charge = increase phase disruptor range to 30. +15 pts

JUSTIFICATION

Considering how the dragoon is a large sized unit in game, it is likely that it would have a stat line similar to a MC. However, as zerglings can tear it apart with ease, it is therefore absolutely horrible in CC, which is represented by its low WS, ini and A values.

The Phase Disruptor is AP3 to represent its effectiveness at countering heavy armor, and its S6 as that would be the value required to inflict ID on a human. In one of the cinematics, a single shot from a dragoon completely vaporized a human officer.

Move Through Cover and relentless is to represent it being a quadrupedal weapons platform

Zealots 20-30pts per model

Unit composition = 5- 10 models

Troops

Infantry

WS5 BS0 S4 T4 W1 I3 A2 3+ sv

Wargear - psi blades, plasma shielding

Special Rules = Furious Charge, stubborn

Psi blades = Power weapons. In addition, they confer an extra attack to the zealot

plasma Shielding - 4+ invul

Upgrades = Leg augmentation - Gives the zealots fleet. 5pts per model.

JUSTIFICATION

Due to the unit's stature in game, I figured that it would have a stat line similar to that of a space marine. However, I never thought of protoss being particularly fast, hence their I3
As they are CC specialists, they would have better WS than a SM.

Since they are fanatics, they are stubborn.

Codex: Protoss

Cryonicleech — GMT

Psi Blades need not necessarily be power weapons. It still takes them a couple of hits to kill Terran marines. I think rending is more appropriate, but meh, to each his own.

What's the deal with giving invul saves to everybody? 4+ invuls on everything wouldn't be balanced in the slightest. 5+ at best, IMHO.

Codex: Protoss

CthuluIsSpy — GMT

Cryonicleech wrote:Psi Blades need not necessarily be power weapons. It still takes them a couple of hits to kill Terran marines. I think rending is more appropriate, but meh, to each his own.

What's the deal with giving invul saves to everybody? 4+ invuls on everything wouldn't be balanced in the slightest. 5+ at best, IMHO.

I dunno...those psi blades do look pretty dangerous, and sort of energy-looking.
Then again, rending does make more sense I guess, since it still takes them a while to kill heavily armored targets.
Maybe Warp Blades as powered then, I guess? Dark Templar can kill most basic infantry in 1-2 hits.

The reason why I gave them a 4+ invul is because they can shrug off siege cannon hits. It just made sense to me to give them that.

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Cryonicleech wrote:Why not make Dragoons T5 with 2 wounds?

well, all of this is me trying to translate between stat systems. I had thought about making the Dragoon a walker, but it isn't good at cc at all. I thought of making it a light tank but now that I'm reading comments, the Dragoon and stalker isn't as durable as the Reaver or immortal.

Why are Zeaots WS 6?

If you read the book "Queen of Blades" Raynor overlooks a fight when Zeratul and Tassadar first meet and he described it as if they had profected melee combat to the point that it didn't look like a fight, but a dance.

Why do they have two wounds?

Yeah, I think dropping the lots down to 1 wound can do.

They shouldn't have the option for a 12" assault, much less 12" movements. 24 Inch Assault?

Well, I think that's why Blizzard didn't go with both when they moved to SC2, What I was going for when translating them was make a beefier Howling Banshee that was slower in cc, but beefier Genestealers seem to be a better fit.

Also, Sentries are WAY undercosted. Lascannons, Autocannons, Heavy Bolters, and the like are all S3? That's.... ridiculous.

Yeah, it's going to need some adjustment but, I just tried to introduce that wonderful defensive unit.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cryonicleech wrote:What's the deal with giving invul saves to everybody? 4+ invuls on everything wouldn't be balanced in the slightest. 5+ at best, IMHO.

What I was trying to translate with that is the Protoss shields, every Protoss has a shield of some strength. For example the Archon is 350 shield and 10 health ish, so what I was thinking for the Archon was T3 W1 2+ invuln.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Maybe Warp Blades as powered then, I guess? Dark Templar can kill most basic infantry in 1-2 hits.

Yeah, for Dark Templar I was thinking of something like a powerfist at WS 6 and Zeratul will have a Mastercrafted thunderhammer at WS 9, because come on it's Zeratul.

Re:Codex: Protoss

CthuluIsSpy — GMT

Nah mate. Fists and hammers don't work that well. I mean, they are still using swords.

Now, a power weapon that gives 2D6 armor penetration and rerolls to wound, that would fit the effect of a warp blade a bit better.

As for the guardian shield, why not just have it confer a reroll to saves? That's a lot better than reducing everything to S3.

Re:Codex: Protoss

erikwfg — GMT

Firstly I think the answer would be no to including starcraft into 40k. 2nd, I haven't played SC2 yet.

Still, I think the protoss shields should work like wounds, and because they slowly regenerate maybe make it like feel no pain, or feel no pain with a harder target # (5+ or 6+). Having the extra wound from a shield also makes the model immune to instant death. I think these changes would be the best representation of how the units work in game.

The protoss blades are psychic energy aren't they? I think that would be as good as power weapons. For terran marines keep in mind how huge that armor is, it could count as an exo suit and be adding W and T to the humans. So a power weapon vs a multi wound model would take more hits to kill, but there wouldn't be a save.

I don't think dragoons should have relentless.

The dark templar getting a high strength weapon with rending sounds appropriate. Remember that vs vehicles they would be going against rear armor, which is usually 10.

Zealot WS is not 6. Protoss are kind've crap compared to the skill of eldar. At best they are WS 4, unless harlequins have higher. I also don't think they get more than 1 attack, +1 for 2 weapons.

I'll try to help out more, but I don't know if i'll be able to.

Codex: Protoss

Daemonhammer — GMT

Cool idea, but it would be a shame if someone made a Zerg codex and they kept loosing to Zerg Rushes

Re:Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

OK, so if we may close on the Zealots, I think this will satisfy everyone as far as the powerful unit it should be vs the need for balence.

Zealot.......25 pts per model

WS BS S T W I A LD Sv
5 0 4 4 1 3 2 10 3+

Type: Infantry
Composition: 5-10 Zealots
Wargear: Psi Blades, Plasma Shield
Special Rules: Furious Charge, Fearless

Options:
The Tribe may take
Leg Enhancements.....5 pts per model

Psi Blades: Psi Blades are rending and count as a set of two close combat weapons.
Leg Enhancements: Zealots have the Fleet universal special rule.
Plasma Shield: Plasma shield grants the Feel no Pain universal special rule.

Plasma Shield on infantry can give FnP as long as as Plasma Shield on the vehicles gives an invulnerable like Flicker Field.
WS 5 is satisfies the fluff of them training for hundreds of years, so compared to a Gaurdsmen or a Hormagaunt they will be unbelievable in CC.
The 3+ and FnP satisfies me as far as durability.
Psi Blades can be CCW with rending as long as we agree Warp Blades are definitely powerweapons.
I think they should be fearless. They fear know evil, for the Khala is their strength!
All in all, we're looking at a 125-300 point sqaud that are going to rock in CC and are going to be a pain in the butt to kill.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
JUSTIFICATION

Considering how the dragoon is a large sized unit in game, it is likely that it would have a stat line similar to a MC. However, as zerglings can tear it apart with ease, it is therefore absolutely horrible in CC, which is represented by its low WS, ini and A values.

The Phase Disruptor is AP3 to represent its effectiveness at countering heavy armor, and its S6 as that would be the value required to inflict ID on a human. In one of the cinematics, a single shot from a dragoon completely vaporized a human officer.

Move Through Cover and relentless is to represent it being a quadrupedal weapons platform

I do like making the Dragoon a MC and a stat line that should clearly say that this is for ranged support of the Zealots.
If you watch the animation of the Dragoon, it clearly stops, opens it's weapons bay, and fires....I don't think relentless would fit it well.
I thiink Dragoons should still be basic troops because I don't feel the jump from Gateway to Cybernetic Core is a big enough jump to say, "OK, these guys are the elite Protoss."
For that same reason, I was thinking based on it's role the Stalker should be a fast attack but, now I'm thinking the Stalker should be a basic troop choice.

Re:Codex: Protoss

erikwfg — GMT

Warp blades are probably ignoring armor saves, psi blades could be rending.

I dont' know if LD 10 is right. Protoss don't seem perfect enough to have it that high. Maybe 8-9. I agree on the fearless though, maybe stubborn too.

The 3+ armor seems to high, just too much of them is exposed.

I think 5 pts each for fleet is too much, it should be something like 20 or 25 for the entire squad.

You have to remember that FnP doesn't get rolled vs power weapons and stuff with good AP (I think), so it doesn't make as much sense vs those. I still think the extra wound thing is a good way to do it. If you really don't like it then I'm thinking about 1 of the dark eldar fields, but it wouldn't work for a whole unit... So the only other thing I can see is an invulnerable save.

Codex: Protoss

BlaxicanX — GMT

From a fluff perspective, a single swipe from a Zealot's psi-blades will cut right through a marine's armor like butter. It also does similar damage to vehicle armor. The closest thing in WH40K to the lethality of psi-blades would be a power fist.

Obviously, you can't give a troop choice a bunch of power fists for free, so I would think power weapons work fine. A dark templar's warp blade, on the other hand, would make sense as counting as having a power fist.

Anyway, it's difficult to make a fluffy zealot that's balanced because while the zealot is the Protoss' "troop choice", its actual abilities and stats are more akin to the "elite" choices in a codex. Zealots have faster than human reflexes, can turn intangible, have telepathy and mind-control powers, shields that make power armor look bad, battlefield pre-cognition, super strength, and astartes level durability.

Here's a thread I made awhile back that shows a Zealot's capabilities from an actual fluff perspective.

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

I crunched some numbers using the law of averages, I match 6 squads of Zealots vs 6 sqauds of TACs equipped with ML, Melta and 6 Razorback with TL Las.

In scenerio 1 the SM held back and stood their ground, the Zealots got their butt handed to them.

In scenerio 2 the SM pushed forward with the Razorback, and the battle was quite bloody.

I think the last stat sheet I posted is a good balence. Now, shall we move on?

Re:Codex: Protoss

Shadowbrand — GMT

MY LIFE FOR AIUR.

Codex: Protoss

BlaxicanX — GMT

broodstar wrote:I crunched some numbers using the law of averages, I match 6 squads of Zealots vs 6 sqauds of TACs equipped with ML, Melta and 6 Razorback with TL Las.

In scenerio 1 the SM held back and stood their ground, the Zealots got their butt handed to them.

In scenerio 2 the SM pushed forward with the Razorback, and the battle was quite bloody.

I think the last stat sheet I posted is a good balence. Now, shall we move on?

No. We must all discuss this until hell freezes over. it is the only way

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

BlaxicanX wrote:
broodstar wrote:I crunched some numbers using the law of averages, I match 6 squads of Zealots vs 6 sqauds of TACs equipped with ML, Melta and 6 Razorback with TL Las.

In scenerio 1 the SM held back and stood their ground, the Zealots got their butt handed to them.

In scenerio 2 the SM pushed forward with the Razorback, and the battle was quite bloody.

I think the last stat sheet I posted is a good balence. Now, shall we move on?

No. We must all discuss this until hell friezes over. it is the only way

lol

Codex: Protoss

Lucre — GMT

Make a dragoon a walker with like strength five or six. I'd also much rather it have av 11. It seems super silly that it can be blown apart or lose it's weapon as easily as it can. I mean, it's a lot tougher than a stalker or a lot of units out there and it seems really vulnerable to auto cannon or scatter laser shots for that. Should a single Banshee's probably typhoon missile launcher be enough to pop a dragoon?

You also want to think about what AV other mechanical units will be if the dragoon is already just about as low as can be.

You could also reduce the range of crap shooting in with guardian shield. It could also do strength or AP reduction or stop double rolls for penetration. It could also be improving cover/ invulnerable saves.

I think the zealot movement options are a little too awesome at of now.

I also think think that you could have squadrons with stalkers and dragoons mixed in, that might be neat.

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Lucre wrote:Make a dragoon a walker with like strength five or six. I'd also much rather it have av 11. It seems super silly that it can be blown apart or lose it's weapon as easily as it can. I mean, it's a lot tougher than a stalker or a lot of units out there and it seems really vulnerable to auto cannon or scatter laser shots for that. Should a single Banshee's probably typhoon missile launcher be enough to pop a dragoon?

Yeah, I had just worked out the math using CthuluIsSpy's template vs the same squads the Zealots faced. The Dragoons will have to be buffed, theoretically they will only kill 2 Lasbacks let alone the 60 marines.

You also want to think about what AV other mechanical units will be if the dragoon is already just about as low as can be.

The Dragoon should be a medium AV I'll try it with 11 or 12 and see how that works, The Stalker should definately be fast and light AV, the Immortal is going to be a tricky mechanic it'll have to be able to laugh at Lascannons yet be torn apart by bolters. The Scout, Phenix, Warp Prism and Corsair will be Fast Attack and therefore light. The Reaver most likely won't need much armor because of the 72" gun, the Void Ray wont need much armor because it'll have a Convertion Beamer, Carrier will be 14 all around and be a flying Landraider with no weapons, and should be open topped because of the hanger. The arbiter will be light and have nice support and control abilities. the Colossus will be fun to write, I'm just not sure what AV to asign to it.

You could also reduce the range of crap shooting in with guardian shield. It could also do strength or AP reduction or stop double rolls for penetration. It could also be improving cover/ invulnerable saves.

I was at my local shop and one guy suggested to make Guardian Shield like Psychic Hood, so for a roll off, the attack is stopped or goes through.

I also think think that you could have squadrons with stalkers and dragoons mixed in, that might be neat.

The problem with that is, this game doesn't really support mixing sqauds and sqaudrons. Another question I would have for that thought is, when the Stalkers Blink, what happens to the Dragoons?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I was thinking of putting the Mothership in as a HQ chioce, but I think that is best left for a super heavy.

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

Immortals: Invuln equal to AP of weapon, up to 2++

Codex: Protoss

Lucre — GMT

Glad my input hit home, I usually feel like a blathering idiot on this board.

Consider strange versions of guardian shields and protoss shields. I hate to have the act exactly like the cover everyone else is getting anyway.

I would Zealot Legs could add fleet and moves through cover rules. I was also initially very attracted to them moving like beasts with their upgrade, but that would stop it form existing in 2 parts. Maybe Charge could give them the furious charge USR and an extra d6 on the charge?

Concerning Charge-Lots and other fast melee units like Speed-Lings represented in 40k, I'd consider giving them a bonus to sweeping advance or fearless combat resolution wounds. I think it is somewhat apt.

Cloak will be an interesting mechanic to show.

It might be an elegant solution to why marines can take out armored vehicles by giving them some sort of low strength rending attack, or some modified version of rending along those lines.

Codex: Protoss

AnomanderRake — GMT

...You guys do know the Protoss are simply ripoffs of the Eldar in the first place, right? Why not just use the Eldar rules?

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

You're tying that eternaldarkness guy for most pedantic and unhelpful posts at the moment. If you don't understand, or for some reason, can't cognify what this forum is for, then perhaps you should see this post.

You know the Eldar are simply ripoffs of tolkien elves in the first place, right? Why not just read books?

Oh right, because some of us like to have fun.

Codex: Protoss

DiRTWaL — GMT

Starcraft was supposed to be a GW game but GW pulled out.

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

This thread is about me writting a Codex and getting advise on mechanics translation and balence issues.

I will not let you hijack this thread!

If you'd like to have a Starcraft vs 40k discussion pm me or make it in General Disscussion.

Thank You.

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

My 2cents on design philosophy here: It's easier to create and incorporate a simple to understand special rule or method than to rape the existing system into accepting a transfer.

Secondly, capturing the fluff of the army is much more important than capturing an accurate mechanical representation in regards to fandexes in my opinion.

With this in mind, I present the following options

1) Squad sizes all go up to 12. Nothing says "Starcraft" like selecting up to 12 models for movement.

2) Overcost everything by a little, but make sure there's the unspoken "This could come down 10% and be fine" - when the dex is finished, drop the points on everything 10% and it will be fine.

3) balance by finding the break point, figuring the cause of brokenness, and scaling that back. Sometimes it's not a points issue, but an interference with basegame mechanics. Sometimes you just need to make a list that maxes out a single unit in its best circumstances in order to figure out what breaks that unit.

This said: Zealots at 25ppm in squad sizes of 4-12 would be fine with fleet, and a 5 point upgrade to 12" assault. 300+ point assault squads need to have SOMETHING going for them, or they get squashed, especially at a mere I4 on the charge. Look at bloodcrushers, for instance: 40 ppm, but they get the works - 2wounds, power weapons, higher str and ini, invulns... very decent unit, but has no support around it except for one, single, build - Max Crushers and get Fateweaver. This is not conductive to 'fun' play, as it either 'crushers' the enemy, or flops. Having zealots able to reach the enemy without a guarantee of actually killing them is much more interactive for both sides!

Edit: Another route you could go would be to directly incorporate mineral costs as army costs, and have most armies composed of 12 units. So we get a Zealot as an MC with WS7 S6 T6 W4 I5 A4 Ld10 Sv3+/5++ FNP regenerate, or something crazy like that, at 100 points.

Codex: Protoss

Kain — GMT

chrisrawr wrote:Immortals: Invuln equal to AP of weapon, up to 2++

Doesn't the Immortal's shield also apply in melee? I guess we'll have to wait and see if 6e really does give melee weapons AP values. Also, might be a tad odd for rending.

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

Kain wrote:
chrisrawr wrote:Immortals: Invuln equal to AP of weapon, up to 2++

Doesn't the Immortal's shield also apply in melee? I guess we'll have to wait and see if 6e really does give melee weapons AP values. Also, might be a tad odd for rending.

Hmmm, good point. Perhaps a "Strength 6+" method, but I think you could also do "+1 front armour for every str above 6" so that they always pen on a 6+?

Codex: Protoss

DemetriDominov — GMT

My life for NERZUL... Oh wait...

Codex: Protoss

Kain — GMT

chrisrawr wrote:
Kain wrote:
chrisrawr wrote:Immortals: Invuln equal to AP of weapon, up to 2++

Doesn't the Immortal's shield also apply in melee? I guess we'll have to wait and see if 6e really does give melee weapons AP values. Also, might be a tad odd for rending.

Hmmm, good point. Perhaps a "Strength 6+" method, but I think you could also do "+1 front armour for every str above 6" so that they always pen on a 6+?

Yes that would help prevent weirdness such as your weapons actually becoming less effective when they rend.

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

"Immortal Shielding - Weapons may never roll more than 1D6 to penetrate an Immortal's AV, and always require a 6 to Penetrate. The Immortal has a 5+ Invulnerable Save."

Re:Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Phoenix.......75 pts

BS F S R
4 10 10 10

Type: Vehicle (Skimmer)
Composition: 1 Phoenix
Wargear: 2 Ion Cannons, Plasma Shield
Special rules: Protoss Flyer, Graviton Beam

Options:
May take
Anion Pulse-Crystals........25 pts

Protoss Flyer: ignores all terrain and can not be assaulted except by jump-infantry and Jet-bikes and can not be rammed except by Skimmers. The Flyer can never take a cover save because of intervening terrain, and all weapons wishing to fire at a Flyer ignore line of sight restictions.
Anion Pulse-Crystals: Increase the max range of the Phoenix weapons to 30".
Ion Cannon:
Range Strength AP Type
24" 8 3 Heavy 2 *
Ion Cannons may be fired even if the Phoenix has moved Flat-Out. Ion Cannons may only be fired at Jump-infantry, Jet-bikes and Skimmers.
Graviton Beam: During the shooting phase, target model within 12" can't make any action until that units next turn. The Phoenix can't make any other action while using Graviton Beam.
Plasma Shield: Plasma shield confers a 5+ invulnerable.

This thing has "I'm going to kill Tau" written all over it.

Re:Codex: Protoss

Kain — GMT

broodstar wrote:Phoenix.......75 pts

BS F S R
4 10 10 10

Type: Vehicle (Skimmer)
Composition: 1 Phoenix
Wargear: 2 Ion Cannons, Plasma Shield
Special rules: Protoss Flyer, Graviton Beam

Options:
May take
Anion Pulse-Crystals........25 pts

Protoss Flyer: ignores all terrain and can not be assaulted except by jump-infantry and Jet-bikes and can not be rammed except by Skimmers. The Flyer can never take a cover save because of intervening terrain, and all weapons wishing to fire at a Flyer ignore line of sight restictions.
Anion Pulse-Crystals: Increase the max range of the Phoenix weapons to 30".
Ion Cannon:
Range Strength AP Type
24" 8 3 Heavy 2 *
Ion Cannons may be fired even if the Phoenix has moved Flat-Out. Ion Cannons may only be fired at Jump-infantry, Jet-bikes and Skimmers.
Graviton Beam: During the shooting phase, target model within 12" can't make any action until that units next turn. The Phoenix can't make any other action while using Graviton Beam.
Plasma Shield: Plasma shield confers a 5+ invulnerable.

This thing has "I'm going to kill Tau" written all over it.

One yahoo with a broadside battlesuit and some markerlighters are all it's going to take to send that thing crashing down.

Additionally, a unit that can only fire at certain kinds of units isn't terribly useful. All someone has to do is build a jump, jet, and skimmer free list (easy to do) and the unit is completely incapable of doing anything at all besides zip around and hope someone shoots at it instead of something more valuable.

Re:Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Kain wrote:
One yahoo with a broadside battlesuit and some markerlighters are all it's going to take to send that thing crashing down.

Additionally, a unit that can only fire at certain kinds of units isn't terribly useful. All someone has to do is build a jump, jet, and skimmer free list (easy to do) and the unit is completely incapable of doing anything at all besides zip around and hope someone shoots at it instead of something more valuable.

Sir, I think you underestimate the beauty of control.
When it runs out of targets it tells legendaries like Abbadon, Swarmlord and Stormcaller to shutup.
OK let's say you tailer for that, that takes out Hammerhead, Crisis Suit, Devil Fish, and Pirhanas, oh and no Drones. With one unit I got you to take away your tanks, Drones and most importantly...your mobility. With one unit I got you to play gunline, for 75-225 points I got you to play the game I want you to play.
So, what you have left to build a list with is Stealth Suit, Firewarriors without transports, Pathfinders, and Broadside. The only thing that makes that close to viable is the Broadsides. But then again, Tau aren't going to have the same book forever.

Codex: Protoss

Runna — GMT

I don't have a big problem with the vehicle version of the Dragoons, but you do kill them in CC, so AV 10 or counts as AV 10 in CC should be in there somewhere if it stays a vehicle.
There was some OP stuff on there.
The second post of Zealots is good.
Curious, if they have one or two attacks base as the psi blades count as two weapons which with 2 base would give them three attacks or one base and (2) in parenthesis as I did there.
Rending is better than power weapoins on the blade because rending on a 6 gets an extra 1d3 to Armor pen which means that the Zealots can be pretty good against vehicles with the charge, even on rare occasions glancing a Land Raider. (Angry face, as I always make angry face whenever I mention the Land Raider.)

Also Dragoons are definately troops.

The Sentry entry I'm not fond of, to be blunt.
It started out cool, until the everything counts as st 3...
Within 6" of a unit of Sentry's (sentries...) Protoss models (not units) are granted a 3+ invulnerable save.
Or something like that, and then, also, make it more expensive.

The thing that makes the 12" range buff, not worth a hundred points, even though it's good, and I think the power of the weapons you listed should be switched. Blast being 5-4 and 2 shot being 8-3.

The weapon and singularity charge posted in the, here's my take thing were pretty good.
(It was a good take, but I think the two ideas should be merged. I don't remember the Dragoon even really striking back at all in CC.)
As a vehicle it having two weapons without upgrades increases its cost. (Maybe it should also only be able to fire one weapon a turn, as not moving it right now would let it fire both...unless that's what you're going for...)

Codex: Protoss

Flinty — GMT

I haven't made many protoss so far, but I think Zealots fit into the assault terminator slot quite nicely as well. Twin lightning claws and heavy armour matches up well with what they appear to be armed with, the energy shields in particular. So I agree with the later incarnation of the Zealot.

The sentry could work like a Mek's KFF? This already does a similar job in a similar slot in the army.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

AnomanderRake wrote:...You guys do know the Protoss are simply ripoffs of the Eldar in the first place, right? Why not just use the Eldar rules?

Because the make-up of a Protoss army is nothing like that of an Eldar one. They only have 1 proper infantry unit and it really doesn't fit in with banshees very well at all.

Codex: Protoss

Lucre — GMT

I'd like it if you could attach a lot of these units to other units.

For instance, you will often see zealots wandering in a clump of another unit, in order to tank hits and provide some relatively high damage against short ranged attackers and for the relatively high damage they do vs concave they take up / number of units can surround them.

If zealots came in packs, but could be split up to join other units, like say wolfguard / incarnations of warlocks / crypteks / homunculi that would be pretty neat. It would also help enforce the need to have zealot legs on some of them before doing this, while throwing them in with faster units like stalkers.

I think wound allocation is a pretty neat representation of how this tends to work in both games. It will be hard to make a tactic like the classic first zealot and 2 stalkers push work though... Maybe if the zealot was an IC and could leave the bunch when they got close, or the stalkers wanted to peel back, that would work alright.

I think for the purpose of allowing tanking with melee units, while ranged units attempt to get in shots, you may need to give a whole lot of these guys Hit And Run USR and maybe bigger fallback or consolidation control/moves.

I

Re:Codex: Protoss

skycapt44 — GMT

erikwfg wrote:Firstly I think the answer would be no to including starcraft into 40k. 2nd, I haven't played SC2 yet.

Starcraft is 40k. Zerg=Tyranids, Protos=Eldar, Terran=Space Marines.

It's a complete rip off of the 40k universe.

Re:Codex: Protoss

Lucre — GMT

skycapt44 wrote:
erikwfg wrote:Firstly I think the answer would be no to including starcraft into 40k. 2nd, I haven't played SC2 yet.

Starcraft is 40k. Zerg=Tyranids, Protos=Eldar, Terran=Space Marines.

It's a complete rip off of the 40k universe.

Some people don't mind potentially neutering other peoples fun, just so they've got something to say.
How does this contribute, besides the little bump on the board?

"You guys should just put this out of your mind, they've already done it for you."
Clearly they haven't, and we wouldn't have started if we didn't think it was a fun exercise.

Besides that, the comparisons between eldar and protoss are only sort of thematically similar. They occupy a very similar role in their respective mythos and have some similar alieny-stuff going on, but are very different in play and in flavor.

Codex: Protoss

terranarc — GMT

Just a quick note, dragoons had REALLY short range before singularity.
Marines had range 5, 6 with U237(?) shells.
Dragoons had 4(!) to start and 6(?) with singularity.

Orks could probably shoot farther than a goon. So sad.

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Lucre wrote:I'd like it if you could attach a lot of these units to other units.

For instance, you will often see zealots wandering in a clump of another unit, in order to tank hits and provide some relatively high damage against short ranged attackers and for the relatively high damage they do vs concave they take up / number of units can surround them.

If zealots came in packs, but could be split up to join other units, like say wolfguard / incarnations of warlocks / crypteks / homunculi that would be pretty neat. It would also help enforce the need to have zealot legs on some of them before doing this, while throwing them in with faster units like stalkers.

I think wound allocation is a pretty neat representation of how this tends to work in both games. It will be hard to make a tactic like the classic first zealot and 2 stalkers push work though... Maybe if the zealot was an IC and could leave the bunch when they got close, or the stalkers wanted to peel back, that would work alright.

I think for the purpose of allowing tanking with melee units, while ranged units attempt to get in shots, you may need to give a whole lot of these guys Hit And Run USR and maybe bigger fallback or consolidation control/moves.

I

I like it and I don't like it. The thought of having Lot/Archon or Lot/Stalker is a fun mechanic but, then you could have tanks that act like infantry.
Think of how Swarmlord is able to get a cover save just because his gaurd is in cover, now that's cool because they're his gaurd.
But when you have a Reaver, Carrier or Voidray that you can't get rid of because it joined a squad of Lots, then in becomes a little OP.

Codex: Protoss

Lucre — GMT

Well you can make reavers a vehicle Or critter that cannot be joined because of type or unit size restrictions and I doubt you'd be able to reason an ic joining a lone wolf flier or skimmer to anyone.

Interesting thoughts though.

Codex: Protoss

Kain — GMT

I'm wondering whether the Colossus should be apocalypse only or not. Probably not though, a real titan would dwarf it and a battlefortress or baneblade would massively outgun it.

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Kain wrote:I'm wondering whether the Colossus should be apocalypse only or not. Probably not though, a real titan would dwarf it and a battlefortress or baneblade would massively outgun it.

Naw when I think of the Colossus, I'm thinking of like Banewolf (the flamer chimera) or Tyrannofex.

The Colossus doesn't scream SH but, HS anti-infantry. It's heat Lances I was thinking either an extended range heavy flamer with 2 shots or an extended range Twin-linked heavy flamer.

I think it should also be on a Dreadnought base and stand as tall as a Trygon or Dreadknight.

As far as Cliffwalker, it should be able to ignore difficult/dangrous terrain.

Codex: Protoss

Kain — GMT

The carrier should definitely be superheavy and apocalypse only, might need a bit of a buff since compared to the Manta it's a little weeny.

Codex: Protoss

McNinja — GMT

Kain wrote:The carrier should definitely be superheavy and apocalypse only, might need a bit of a buff since compared to the Manta it's a little weeny.

In SC and SC2 games, nothing is really to scale. Carriers are massive spaceships. Tassadar killed the Overmind with one.

Also, aside from being Psychic and the enigmatic alien race, the Protoss and Eldar have nothing in common.

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

Why not do collossus' attack like the doomscythe's doomray of dooooooom? 2 S8 AP2 lines that must intersect.

Codex: Protoss

Lucre — GMT

Fliers will be tricky, but I think that is going to be any port to WH40K.

I like colossus in the normal play, I just think it'll be hard to implement it's weaknesses.

I was thinking about the stalker. I wonder if it would be apt for it to always be able to move d6 in the assault phase.

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

Why not just give Stalkers the Jet Pack's or Eldar Jetbike's special assault move? Don't limit it to D6, just let em jump 6".

Codex: Protoss

Daemonhammer — GMT

You really want to bring SC into warhammer?
It is common knowledge that STARCRAFT RIPPED OFF 40k!

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

OH NO! YOU FOUND OUR SECRET AND NOW WE ALL HAVE TO STOP HAVING FUN FOREVER!

Or you could read the thread before posting that would be cool, too.

Codex: Protoss

Billinator — GMT

Hey, broodstar, and good initiative on attempting a Protoss codex. If balanced out, they could be a fun army to play, I'm sure.

Though, a mistake I often see people commit, when attempting to write off their own codices, is overdoing or underdoing certain units. While we do want to put an efford into making them fun and interesting, we don't want to overcommit.

I'm a little short on time right now, so I cannot contribute until later. But I think you should edit your 1st post with all that you (and others) come up with. Add in changes to stats and abilities in other text colours, and add to the end of the units entry what have been changed. That'd make it much more manageable, I think

Codex: Protoss

khaosspacemarines — GMT

Daemonhammer wrote:You really want to bring SC into warhammer?
It is common knowledge that STARCRAFT RIPPED OFF 40k!

I honestly don't care. In fact Starcraft and Warhammer are two of my favorite universes, it is my hope that in the future we see more "rip offs" as these are two of the most awesome settings ever.

I would say give stalkers the Move in assault rule like tau/ jet bikes. I think power weapons on Zealots are fine , yes they take several goes to kill larger things but i think this is represented in the strength of the weapons.(and if those energy blades aren't power weapons i don't know what is!)

Not sure on colossus, thinking an expensive unit.

Do you plan on doing Zeratul?

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Front page updated.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

khaosspacemarines wrote:
Daemonhammer wrote:You really want to bring SC into warhammer?
It is common knowledge that STARCRAFT RIPPED OFF 40k!

I honestly don't care. In fact Starcraft and Warhammer are two of my favorite universes, it is my hope that in the future we see more "rip offs" as these are two of the most awesome settings ever.

I would say give stalkers the Move in assault rule like tau/ jet bikes. I think power weapons on Zealots are fine , yes they take several goes to kill larger things but i think this is represented in the strength of the weapons.(and if those energy blades aren't power weapons i don't know what is!)

Not sure on colossus, thinking an expensive unit.

Do you plan on doing Zeratul?

Oh yes, you have to have Zeratul, he's iconic, the Yoda of Starcraft.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Daemonhammer wrote:You really want to bring SC into warhammer?
It is common knowledge that STARCRAFT RIPPED OFF 40k!

This shows the double standard! Make a 40k map for SC and you get rave review. Make codexes for 40k and you get boo'd.

Codex: Protoss

Runna — GMT

Walkers need an Attack, and Initiative value, as I recall.

It reads a little better now, worth a playtest after you add some of the other stats in.

Codex: Protoss

Kain — GMT

Zealots aren't the only proper infantry units in a Protoss army, you do have High and Dark Templars after all.

Codex: Protoss

CthuluIsSpy — GMT

Kain wrote:Zealots aren't the only proper infantry units in a Protoss army, you do have High and Dark Templars after all.

In a 40k army, those would be elites.

Codex: Protoss

Billinator — GMT

Sentry
I'd change it to a 1-model unit, putting it in the Elites section, adding the IC rule to it and toning down the Guardian Shield ability. I'd also improove it's Ld, as we ARE dealing with a psyker unit. relying on a Ld 8 psychic test is too unrealiable. The IC, rather than a unit upgrade for, say, Zealots units, is to make it more fragile. This means that it can be targeted out in CC. Elite choice is simply stressing on the utility of the unit, as it is a obvious choice to have your whole army getting a better save.

Guardian Shield
- All models within 12" gain +1 to their invulnerable save against shooting .
(Reasoning: ATM, we're looking at a unit granting ALL units within 12" a Terminator TH/SS save. Furthermore, the unit granting this ability has T3 and is a stand alone unit, meaning it'll most likely go down in the first turn.)

Force Field
- If the Psychic test is successful, you may place the small blast marker within 24" of the sentry. Treat the blast marker as difficult terrain. Any unit wishing to move over the Blast marker must make a difficult terrain test, discarding the highest roll.
(Reasoning: The Large Blast marker is too large, considering it's size in game. I was considering changing it to a Small Blast that was treated as impassable terrain. But giving the fact, that you could completely block off whole paths with that, would be over the top. I also don't think that we want to shatter it, as you already are taking a psychic test to throw it down. (Hood, anyone?))

Psy Shields
Furthermore, I'd represent the Protoss shields as low invulnerable saves. (We don't want the Protoss fielding Terminator Troops or similar.) It's supposed to take a blow or two for the model. Not allowing him for re-rolling whatever damage he receives.

Zealot
I feel this unit needs a better Ld and remove the fearless rule, as I don't think it's suited for a Troops choice. The Zealot are, however, a young Templar. So it's only fair that we grant them a high Ld, reflecting the nature of their mental control. I'd also consider Stubborn, as they are very disciplined warriors.
- The FnP rule is too much, if you ask me. What you're basically having now, is a 3+ save with re-rolls, that has 4 attacks on the charge and, oh, yeah... Rending!. That's... Well... Only for Grey Knights, which doesn't know anything about balance! I'd tone it down to 1 attack as it's base attacks and give it a +6 invulnerable save. (Zealots are brutal, indeed. But they're not Genestealers!)
- Boost their Initiative to 4, as the I3 is pointless. I3 + FC = I4 on the charge. Better have them represent that heavy one-time blow, that we see ingame by striking first (against MEQ, that is), as they launch their assaults, together with +1 strength.
- If we apply all these nerfs, it's only fair that we nerfs it's cost as well. I'd say 20 pts per model and Legs at 4 pts per model.

All this gives us a 24 pts unit, that has WS 5 (3+ against MEQ), S5 on the charge (again, 3+), strikes first against MEQ first turn with 3 attacks that rends. (Compared to a Genestealer with FC at 17 pts per model, that - on the charge - has 3 attacks at WS6, S5, I6 and 5+ save). The extra points, compared to the Genestealer, is fine, considering the higher save + invulnerable save.

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

Problem: Genestealer with FC is overcosted and can outflank or infiltrate, has move through cover, SHOULD have assault grenades; using it as a basis of comparison is faulty.

Comparison unit you should be using: Thunderwolf Cav. Potential 24" assault range, 5PF or 6WC attacks on the charge (Rerolling to-hit AND to-wound) or 6+2S Attacks (S7)... 2W, S5, can have 3+/3++ in the unit, and rending base attacks AND grenades, counterattack, ATSKNF, Acute Senses. 50--80 points per model.

Zealot: Potential 18" assault range (-5 points for range), 3 rending attacks on charge (no rerolls)(-5 points for attacKs), 1W (-10 points for W), S5 (on charge)(-5 points for S), 3+ can have 5++ with guardian shield(-5 points for defensive options), rending base attacks - no grenades, or other goodies. (-5 points for defensive options)

At 15 points per model, I would buy rending, fleet, nerfedmarines with no grenades.

Re:Codex: Protoss

azgrim — GMT

An idea to get stats right is compare a zealot to a marine on a stat per stat basis. Assuming a Terran and a space marine have similar stats . So something like this

WS- Zealots seem to bet better at CC than marines but marines dont have a CC unit so its hard to compare. A 4/5 would be about right here. Maybe WS 4/5 on zealots and WS 5 /6 for dark templar
BS-zealots dont have guns so a 0 or whatever everything else is
S-zealots do more damage then marines so S5
T-Zealots have alot of health but giving them 2 wounds would not fit 40k basic infantry so T5 instead of 2 wounds
W-1 just like everything else
I- hard to tell from the game same as marine or better
A-zealots have two CC attack so just carry that over 2 base plus 2 CCweapons for 3 attacks base.

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Billinator wrote:Sentry
I'd change it to a 1-model unit, putting it in the Elites section, adding the IC rule to it and toning down the Guardian Shield ability. I'd also improove it's Ld, as we ARE dealing with a psyker unit. relying on a Ld 8 psychic test is too unrealiable. The IC, rather than a unit upgrade for, say, Zealots units, is to make it more fragile. This means that it can be targeted out in CC. Elite choice is simply stressing on the utility of the unit, as it is a obvious choice to have your whole army getting a better save.

Well, one thing I was thinking about was to make them a squad of IC's similar to Wolf Guard, so you can buy like 5 for 1 FoC slot. While Sentries are a marvelious defensive unit, they arn't something one would spam. And as I said with the Dragoon, I don't like the jump from Gateway to Cybernetic Core is a big enough jump to say, "ok, these guys are the elites of the protoss."

Guardian Shield
- All models within 12" gain +1 to their invulnerable save against shooting .
(Reasoning: ATM, we're looking at a unit granting ALL units within 12" a Terminator TH/SS save. Furthermore, the unit granting this ability has T3 and is a stand alone unit, meaning it'll most likely go down in the first turn.)

I believe you are right. While popping Guardian Shield can change the coarse of a battle, it's not an "I win"' button. Maybe, all weapons shooting at a Protoss within 12" of the Sentry suffer a -1 to Strength.

Re:Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Here's a question that could answer whether the Carrier should be HS or SH. Is the firepower of this Battlecruiser comparable to the Stormraven or the Thunderhawk?

Codex: Protoss

McNinja — GMT

Battlecruisers are space ships, not small transports. They are more like Thunderhawks than Stormravens, though even that is a bit too small. Remember, the majority of the SC2 campaign cutscenes and dialogue takes place on a battlecruiser.

Carriers are even bigger than Battlecruisers, and if I'm not mistaken, a Cruiser vaporizes a terran scavenger ship in the opening cinematic of SC1 by fully encompassing it and blowing it up.

Codex: Protoss

Kain — GMT

That being said, starcraft capital ships seem to be hideously undergunned compared to their warhammer counterparts. Of course, it is perfectly valid to argue that compared to the capital ships of other universes, Warhammer vessels are overgunned to the point of being silly.

Codex: Protoss

Shadox — GMT

broodstar wrote:
Billinator wrote:Sentry
I'd change it to a 1-model unit, putting it in the Elites section, adding the IC rule to it and toning down the Guardian Shield ability. I'd also improove it's Ld, as we ARE dealing with a psyker unit. relying on a Ld 8 psychic test is too unrealiable. The IC, rather than a unit upgrade for, say, Zealots units, is to make it more fragile. This means that it can be targeted out in CC. Elite choice is simply stressing on the utility of the unit, as it is a obvious choice to have your whole army getting a better save.

Well, one thing I was thinking about was to make them a squad of IC's similar to Wolf Guard, so you can buy like 5 for 1 FoC slot. While Sentries are a marvelious defensive unit, they arn't something one would spam. And as I said with the Dragoon, I don't like the jump from Gateway to Cybernetic Core is a big enough jump to say, "ok, these guys are the elites of the protoss."

Why not make them a squad upgrade like a sergeant? So you could control which units get the buff (if you give the guardian shield only to the attached unit) and imho it would be kinda strange for a sentry to be attached to something like for example DTs and it would be harder to bring it down because it would be a part of the unit.

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

@Kain having played a fair amount of BFG and comparing it to other starfleet simulators, I can safely and accurately say that the energy output of WH40K vessels is in the kiddy range. When Planet-Crackers are your machinegun bullets and antimatter singularities are bandied about like no-one's business, THEN you've got some real firepower. When your guns alter the matter-information of entire solar systems and rewrite the basic rules of the universe in areas irreparably, causing past and future to merge in ways inimical to even the fiercest of warpstorms, THEN you've got some high-level tech. 40K is rule of cool, but there are no engineers or real sci-fi writers for it; its fluff is closer to romance novels than anything really hard.

Codex: Protoss

Kain — GMT

chrisrawr wrote:@Kain having played a fair amount of BFG and comparing it to other starfleet simulators, I can safely and accurately say that the energy output of WH40K vessels is in the kiddy range. When Planet-Crackers are your machinegun bullets and antimatter singularities are bandied about like no-one's business, THEN you've got some real firepower. When your guns alter the matter-information of entire solar systems and rewrite the basic rules of the universe in areas irreparably, causing past and future to merge in ways inimical to even the fiercest of warpstorms, THEN you've got some high-level tech. 40K is rule of cool, but there are no engineers or real sci-fi writers for it; its fluff is closer to romance novels than anything really hard.

A lance strike still puts out firepower in the terraton range. So WH40k is in the mid-high range. What you're talking about is silliness like the Xeelee Sequence and the Culture which would curbstomp Star Wars, Starcraft, and WH40k put together without breaking a sweat.

In any case I was talking about number of guns. Compared to a imperial cruiser, a star destroyer has far, far fewer guns and a much smaller capacity of small craft.

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

Starwars is weak as balls. Starcraft is paper airplanes. I'm talking about Forge of the Heavens / Neutronium / Larry Niven-verse level tech and hard scifi edge-of-physics speculation. Converting exoplanets into solar-system-wide antimatter shells. quantum-entangled communications and recursive-modifying agent AI electronic warfare. Psychological abuse, direct conversion of enemy craft/parts from matter to antimatter, antimatter wasps, C-speed flechette clouds, sending stars or even planets into supernova via singularitybombs, self-modifying noach ships, modular nanocluster ships, neutronium ships, quark-bonded ships, proto-matter and virtual-matter ships, ghost ships, non-ships, and ships cloaked in their own singularities. Sci-Fi Space travel and warfare has a rich history of stuff that puts 40K and Xeelee to shame, and most of it is at least potentially feasible given our current understanding of the universe, and therefore doesn't need to be handwaved too hard beyond the lack of engineering viability.

Remember, in Rocket Tag, it's quality, not quantity.

Codex: Protoss

broodstar — GMT

Call me mortal, but what you have just discribed is absurd! Converting solar systems into antimatter? non-ships? We don't even know if the warp exists. (M-theory)

But then again, physicist have this nach for telling people absurd sounding things with a straight face. If you read the definition for "Our Holographic Universe" your natural instinct is to say the man is insane. But they do claim to have math backing it up, and I'm not even going to claim to even understand the math, let alone say it's wrong.

Codex: Protoss

chrisrawr — GMT

The math and basic concept behind the holographic universe theory are both fairly solid, but that's why we're pushing for giant lasers in space - for more accurate science and more accurate values on plank lengths and universe granularity.

Solar Systems -> antimatter is a concept similar to quantum entanglement; using a bunch of base anti-matter (quarks and leptons etc) you entangle them with a bunch of regular matter, tricking the universe into thinking the regular matter is antimatter - it's all information that theoretically could be changed.

non-ships are patches of space that you've tricked the universe into rendering. Alternatively, they're ships that you've tricked the universe into thinking are patches of space.

Personally, The bits that scare me the most are the agent-class AI's; one accidental slip in their utility function and you've got recursively optimizing AI amiss in the universe, like a paperclip optimizer - You'd best hope that there are no paperclip optimizers in the universe :<

Codex: Protoss

McNinja — GMT

You know, when you say Holographic Universe all I think of is the band Scar Symmetry.