Which Characters are Broken?

[Bigred]

So as I'm getting deeper and deeper into WFB, I've noticed that there is a lot of grousing over the power levels of various characters and how some should never be allowed in tourneys.

Who do you think are the real culprits and why? Also, if you could, what is the list of characters who need to be reined in for competitive play?

[plastic.legions]

In order to be fair to everyone, Special Characters are simply not allowed in competitive play in most of the good RTT/GT style events here in the mid-west..this was relaxed when Adepticon became part of the GW circuit and comp scoring was ramped up to compensate creating its own unique set of problems. Overall special characters in WFB are there to support to the fluff and are generally undercosted compared to their non named counterparts...trying to selectively ban certain characters (like just banning DoC SC's) will only cause it's own problems. Simply not allowing Lord level specials or Special or "named characters" at all in tournaments is the way to go, doing so also minimizes the necessity for extensive scored composition. Alot of times its not the SC's themselves that are the issue but full "SC Lord + 3 heros" in combination that make it way OTT it really depends on the book, getting rid of them all in Competitive events is the fairest/ best medicine.

[Aldramelech]

I don't like Specials, never have. Any club I have ever been a member of has always considered the use of them as bad form. Local tournaments ban them. Now you can argue that you can make up your own, but I would disagree. Most have unique abilities or gear that is otherwise unavailable to your made up character.

The Culprits? All of them in my opinion.

I really believe that specials are a way for GW to charge more for a model.

[Lord Azaghul]

I started playing wfb before 40k, and when I started special characters were practically taboo, so consequently I have a hard time even considering them in 40k.

I think special characters are mainly for those who lack the ability to play competitively in either there own skill or army (ie not playing a power army). The other side of it is that I prefer to make my own character, legally within the already created frame work. IE my dwarf lord is build using the legal limit on runes, others may have the same combos, but to me, he is my lord - thus my army. As far as specials go, I don't want to play what gw builds, because they aren't my characters - there gw's characters!

I believe this developed out of the idea what was was in the army book was already built to be balanced and fair, and what was in the special characters section was intentially overkill, even in the power armies in fantasy (DE, VC, DoC) the special characters are still over the top even for those armies.

Bottom line - gw doesn't want you to make the game you own - they want you to play the game(s) how they want it to be played!

[Aldramelech]

Agreed. Wouldn't dream of using 40k ones either.....

[brominated]

My experience with my Lizard special characters is that their cost is absolutely prohibitive to what they offer. Yes, Kroak and Mazdamundi are ridiculously powerful, but at 600+ points they just aren't worth it. Even the hero level characters are still way overpriced. 325 for Chakax is astronomical for a hero.

[plastic.legions]

My experience with my Lizard special characters is that their cost is absolutely prohibitive to what they offer. Yes, Kroak and Mazdamundi are ridiculously powerful, but at 600+ points they just aren't worth it. Even the hero level characters are still way overpriced. 325 for Chakax is astronomical for a hero.

That's a great example of the unevenness of SC's across the board Chakax is 325 (actually 335 I think) while Skulltaker is 150!!..etc..

[nathaniel]

Bottom line - gw doesn't want you to make the game you own - they want you to play the game(s) how they want it to be played![/QUOTE]


I dont think GW are trying to control the way we play by giving rules for special characters. the books are designed to encourage us to create our own lords and heroes. Many players including myself take great pleasure in testing numerous combinations of Mag items or skills to try and find that perfectly balanced general or even a character who is perfectly suited for a particular task.

I don't see how GW including rules for SC and producing models for them is a bad thing at all. I own the miniature for Gorbad Ironclaw but have never used him for anything but my own Orc warlord. He is a wonderful miniature that i doubt they would have produced if the rules for Gorbad weren't available in the book.

Finally these characters and the history behind them are often what attracts younger players to the hobby in the first place. I can remember that i found these iconic figures fascinating as a child (now way back in the mists of time) and it still seems to be the case with young players today.

PS despite everything said above i agree completely that they should not be used in tournement play. I just think that having their rules presented enriches the game.

[BilboBaggins]

My pholosiphy on Special Characters is if you want to play them then play LotR where they are pretty much balanced for the game and it's expected.

SC's in Warhammer are OK if you are playing a fun game where the opponent is informed ahead of time that SC's (and which ones) are being used. Not all armies even have decent SC (Chaos Dwarfs ) and some SC's are not that bad in games but others are insane but the best way is to just say no to SC's.

[Faultie]

I only ever bought 2 special characters, and those were for my Kislev force. Why? Because otherwise it is just about impossible to play a standalone force.

That said, is Tsar Boris awesome? Heck yeah! Should he be, though? Of course! He rides a bear!