Characters, Lords or Hero’s

[Snarf]

Just need to find out what the rest of you think.

My club plays a pretty mixed bunch of 40K and fantasy. The 40K chaps can use pretty much who they like in there games but if you want to bring a named Lord or Hero out to play for a fantasy game you have to pretty much get a letter from a second cousin at GW who will vouch that its only a friendly and not a real game before you are allowed to field him. So my question is… Is it only at my club or is this the trend?

[sonsoftaurus]

Hmm, I haven't seen too much in the way of named characters around here. Morghur in some Beast lists, and I expect the new WOC book will see more of them. In Fantasy I think the issue is that some of the characters are pretty expensive, like 400+points compared to the 150-200 range of most 40K ones so the armies tend to be very centered around that character, compounding "deathstar" type builds.

One lucky cannon shot should sort them out though. ;)

[Mazelf]

I play both 40k and WHFB and yes, I do use named chars waaaay more in my 40k games, reason why? Fantasy chars are waaaay overpriced and usually allow for overpowered armies... altho I have to say Ive never stopped an opponent from fielding one, I just dont do it myself (I think I once fielded shadowblade on a 5k point game, thats about it)...

Also, if its in the books and its legal I see no reason why you shouldnt be allowed to play it...

[Lord Azaghul]

Just need to find out what the rest of you think.

My club plays a pretty mixed bunch of 40K and fantasy. The 40K chaps can use pretty much who they like in there games but if you want to bring a named Lord or Hero out to play for a fantasy game you have to pretty much get a letter from a second cousin at GW who will vouch that its only a friendly and not a real game before you are allowed to field him. So my question is… Is it only at my club or is this the trend?

I play both games and that is pretty standard in my area.

I think it mainly steams from fantasty already being an pretty harsh game, and special characters make a tough army niegh unbeatable. This is especially true in any book released during or after 2008.

40k the characters are, for the most part less game changing.

[Bean]

We don't really care about special characters, here. You can generally play whatever you want, both in Fantasy and 40k.

That being said, our local Fantasy tournaments do generally prohibit special characters, while our 40k tournaments generally do not.

I think a lot of the sentiment you're seeing is based around the old rules for special characters, where they generally had substantial restrictions on how and when they could be fielded. Both 40k and Fantasy had a 'special characters are by opponents' permission only' clause in them.

This was generally because special characters were built with special rules and abilities which were significantly out of line with the rules and abilities on generic characters, and the designers weren't confident that the special characters were priced fairly.

Recently, that trend has been reversed. There are no such 'opponent permission' clauses, and special characters are being utilized more heavily--in both games--and are generally priced so that they are pretty fair. Some are still awfully good, and others are just wretched, but the implication is that the designers are at least convinced that none of them are game-breaking to the point where your opponent should have to be forewarned.

[Randroid]

Aside from the bigger tournaments special characters are allowed and encouraged. A lot of the new books have characters which change how you can build your army and I see nothing wrong with that.

I like em with the exception of a couple OP ones.