Herohammer 40K, your thoughts...

[MajorSoB]

I just got of the phone with one of my friends. We were discussing the recent tournament that we ran and ways of improving. The topic of special characters came up and we both seemed to share a similar opinion. While I like the flavor that they add to an army I think they are becoming way to commonplace and overused. I confessed that now when I go to a tourney I will bring two lists, the fair and balanced list and the character heavy beatstick. While I prefer the fluffy list, if I see Vulkan and 4 or his clones along with Kharne, Telion, Kantor, Maugan Ra, Gazgull and Eldred littering the tables I am prepared to turn in the hard list for that days gaming session. I do like what some of the characters add the army but now it seems armies are deteriorating into life support for its special characters. I cant wait to see how many Njal Stormcallers or Logan Grimnars will suddenly spring into existence. I mean I like the game but it seems that characters have now been pushing their way to the forefront right past the basic troops and other units. Is this just my opinion or does anyone else see it like this? What are your thoughts?

[Chumbalaya]

I like that characters are actually viable now, they sucked something fierce in earlier editions. I just wish that you didn't have to bring the same character to unlock certain builds. I'd like to play Salamanders without Vulkan, Deathwing without Belial and so on.

I think enough other HQs offer something that SCs don't, even if it's just being cheaper. Eldrad is neat, but you don't always need every power or maybe you just want a Jetseer. Ghazgkhull is a tank, but I can get by with a regular boss for half the cost or just bring a Biker Boss. Njal is cool, but he requires an army built around him while you can throw a Rune Priest in any army for half the cost. But, with characters like Sammael and Vulkan, I have no alternative. If I want scoring Termies/Bikes, Logan/Belial/Sammael have to be there. If I want Sallies instead of green ultrasmurfs, I need Vulkan.

I wouldn't call it HeroHammer though, they don't really dominate to the point of unbalance. Vulkan is a beat stick, but you don't bring him because he is an army destroyer; his chapter tactics are worth so much more than a master crafted relic blade. I prefer them as another piece of the puzzle, a force multiplier, than just another bruiser. Capable, but mortal.

[AsgeirArnald]

I love SC's for their fluffiness, but in my experience (I've only played Chaos Marines, can't comment on other armies.) the other HQ choices (Lord, Sorcerer, Demon Prince) outperform the named characters by far, especially when you take into account cost versus effectiveness. In my World Eaters army I'd much rather take a Lord with MoK and a Daemon Weapon, with the potential for 17 attacks on the charge, who might stab himself in the foot for 140 points, instead of Kharn with his 5 attacks and potential to stab his buddies in the back for 165 points.

[memnarch_129]

you cant get 17 attacks on the charge Asgeir. The most you can get is 10 same as any stat. 3rd non bold paragraph on pg 6 of the rule book says that "no modifier may raise any characteristic above 10 or lower it below 0".

[BigMac]

MajorSoB you have called it. HeroHammer is here and it is not going away untill 6th ed 40K arrives. I play IG and I never played named characters till the last tourny here in Fort Myers. I played Pask. After the tourny I felt dirty and like a cheat. I can not remember the last SM, IG, or CSM player that I played that did not play with named characters. Heck most are playing with 2! The argument is from SM players is that the named characters are just too cheap in points not to bring. Add in Codex creep and we are in for a long Hero nightmare. I will never play a named character again and that means retiring my Vanquisher. GW had better watchout or it will ruin 40K like it did Fantasy and see the sales come tumbling down. In tournaments I will give a better score to a cheat before a named character player now. Thats how abused the characters have become!

BigMac

[MajorSoB]

Good points lets keep the ball rolling...

@ Chumby: I agree especially with Vulkan, but the reason I think you see him has nothing to do with his fighting prowess but he special ability to twin link flamers and melta weapons. It does get kinda annoying that everyone uses him for this ability. I too understand the other non named HQ do their job but specials now are so cheap its cost prohibitive not to use them. Tell me the last time you saw an autarch played or a generic space marine captain, its just too damn easy to play the other ones for a few points more.

@AA: Being a Chaos player as well I too recognize that chaos is the exception. Most specials there lack Eternal Warrior, and most were toned down from their previous incarnations. The only exception is Abaddon who seems to be priced about right within that codex (not in comparison to other characters elsewhere). Chaos is the one codex where a generic HQ usually outperforms the named ones.

I guess I was reading through the Wolf codex and I was shocked at what some of the characters that I named will now do. I do think Njal Stormcaller is awesome since his powers get progressively stronger each turn. I can project just how hard it would get facing him turn 4, 5 or 6 with most of your army gone. Like Grimnar he is a steal at what he adds to your army for a few measly points.

[The AKH]

@memnarch: IIRC a Khorne Lord with a Bloodfeeder gets 5+2D6 attacks.

With regard to special characters, I don't think the game has become too centred on them quite yet. Most are still fairly pricey, and you are still only a lucky lascannon away from disaster (although the increasing number of Eternal Warriors mitigates this). Sure, often I will build a list around my HQ/characters... but there's a certain charm to playing the game that way, as an army led into battle by a glorious, conquering hero. If I don't feel like playing that way on any given day, I'll drop 110 points on a generic HQ and bring on masses of infantry instead. I don't think the game has swayed so far in favour of SCs yet that you simply cannot play without them - although I can see how it's trending towards that in more competitive circles.

[AsgeirArnald]

The only exception is Abaddon who seems to be priced about right within that codex (not in comparison to other characters elsewhere).

I totally agree about Abbadon. I've used him a few times and for what he does, he's definitely priced right around where he should be. My only problem with him is that as good as he is, I can't justify 275 points that could be used on a lot of other stuff unless its at least a 2000 point game, maybe even 2500. And the majority of the games I play are between 1250 and 1750.

[jcflanker]

I just got of the phone with one of my friends. We were discussing the recent tournament that we ran and ways of improving. The topic of special characters came up and we both seemed to share a similar opinion. While I like the flavor that they add to an army I think they are becoming way to commonplace and overused. I confessed that now when I go to a tourney I will bring two lists, the fair and balanced list and the character heavy beatstick. While I prefer the fluffy list, if I see Vulkan and 4 or his clones along with Kharne, Telion, Kantor, Maugan Ra, Gazgull and Eldred littering the tables I am prepared to turn in the hard list for that days gaming session. I do like what some of the characters add the army but now it seems armies are deteriorating into life support for its special characters. I cant wait to see how many Njal Stormcallers or Logan Grimnars will suddenly spring into existence. I mean I like the game but it seems that characters have now been pushing their way to the forefront right past the basic troops and other units. Is this just my opinion or does anyone else see it like this? What are your thoughts?

SOB, if you are running the tournaments your answer is simple. Do not allow any named special characters in the tournament.

I always made fun lists up for tournaments, lists that were balanced and not cheesy. Recently I realized that the only way to deal with all the cheddar and power gaming armies at tournaments is make such a list for myself and fight fire with fire. If you want to do well in tournaments you have to level the playing field.

[sketchesofpayne]

I want more special characters! They add the narrative aspect to the game. They make a difference. This isn't chess where you bring a 'King', you bring 'Archlord Scrambles the Death Dealer!'

I'm sure GW would have made up a "Build your own HQ" system by now if they could stop the min/max-ers from raping it. That's why the traits system is gone, you could take drawbacks that were irrelevant to your army build. Now the drawback is 'lose combat tactics', which hurts more often than you think it would.

I also like that my opponent doesn't have to name of the traits and drawbacks they chose and can just say "I brought Shrike as my commander" and I know exactly what he confers on the army.

I'd much rather say my opponent is fielding "Vulkan He'stan" than "Lash-prince" or "Bike-Captain" or some other build jargon.