PDA

View Full Version : The pricing of normal equipment



Old_Grumpy
02-09-2005, 17:06
Hello.
It has been common knowledge that magical weapons are not so frequently used due to their high cost in points.
My question is: how much should normal equipment cost?
Looking at the magic items, and bearing in mind that their prices are generally correct, normal weapons are too cheap.
A sword of might, which confers +2 strength costs 40 points.
A two-handed weapon usually costs 4 points for a hero and 6 for a lord.
If you compare the two, the two-handed weapon is much better points-wise.

My suggestion would be to set new costs for mundane weapons based on the cost of magis items. Therefore, a two-handed weapon shoulcost around...
+2 S=40points but,
Two-handed weapon is: 1)two handed, 2)strikes last when not charging and 3)is not magical. I would say that each disadvantage should deduct 5 points from the original cost.
So, a two-handed weapon should cost around 25 points.
Suddenly several magic weapons seem very attractive, don't they?
Now, a lance.
It also confers +2 S, but only if you charge and only on the first round of combat, also you must be mounted to be able to use it. How would you price it?
Maybe...
+2S=40points; only works for the first round(-10, or half the price, I guess the latter is fairer?) when charging(-10, maybe -5 if already half the price) mounted(-5?) and not magical(-5). It would cost between 5 and 10 points. More expensive than now, maybe, but more competetive with two-handed weapons.
What do you think?
How would you price the other weapons?

gorenut
02-09-2005, 18:04
The problem with this systematic pricing is that I don't think you can do it across the board with every race. Each race needs items priced individually because each race might have different degrees of benefits from certain items. Example, a high strength, low initiative Saurus will gain much more from a great weapon than a high initiative, mediocre strength elf.

Crube
02-09-2005, 19:44
True gorenut. Each army is developed individually, with the purpose of trying to make it balanced with other armies. Hence, each item doesnt always correspond with similar ones in other lists.

Having said that, I think that Old_Grumpy's idea is worth thinking about. maybe at Game Designer level. I have been the victom of a Double handed weapon charge too often... :D

Seriously - I think it's a good idea in principle

Commissar von Toussaint
02-09-2005, 20:29
What GW needs to do is price equipment as they claim they price units: based on the army list.

Halberds for S3 troops should cost less than those for S4 or S5.

The same applies to great weapons.

GW used to understand this (second edition 40k weapons were more expensive for marines than IG or orks) but somewhere they lost touch or something.

Rik Valdis
02-09-2005, 20:29
I think that there should be a much smaller gap between S bonus weaponry and GWs for Dwarves and Saurus in particular as otherwise the GW really is a no-brainer. The problem is that the decision is far less clear cut for races such as elves, and penalising one race but not another would have serious issues for game balance.

Avian
02-09-2005, 21:14
Bah, Alter Noble-users seem to think that great weapons are good buys for their I9(!) characters, so losing the Initiative can't be felt to be that big a loss.

(I personally think that the problem is that most magic weapons cost too much and/or do too little)

Crube
02-09-2005, 21:19
(I personally think that the problem is that most magic weapons cost too much and/or do too little)

I think there is a balance issue between the 2

You can argue which is wrong til the cows come home...

Scythe
03-09-2005, 09:37
Altough maybe not fair for every race, I basically agree with Grumpy here. Normal weapons are too cheap for what they do, especially compared to magical weapons. Paying 4 or 6 pts to get 2 points of extra strenght on a model that might have a basic cost of 100 pts or much more is just out of proportion. That, combined with gving the hw-shield bonus also to magical weapons-magical shield combinations, and making several items a little more viable (several items are just nonsense. Why does +1 to hit costs you more pts than +1 attack?) would deal with the issue reasonably I think.

Cenyu
03-09-2005, 10:02
Bah, Alter Noble-users seem to think that great weapons are good buys for their I9(!) characters, so losing the Initiative can't be felt to be that big a loss.


Perhaps because they are supposed to hunt down warmachine crews, lone characters and other things without static combat res they can break/annihilate on the charge?

Who would charge an Alter into a rank and file unit without support and let him get tied in subsequent rounds of combat anyways when the clash Initiative <> GW kicks in?

Bad example, imho.

Avian
03-09-2005, 15:15
Bad example, imho.
It really isn't. You give great weapons to units you think will finish their enemies in one go, preferably with a unit that gets to charge. It doesn't matter what the initiative of the unit is, since you only expect to be fighting for one turn anyway. Hence it's equally good for high I and low I characters.

Great weapon costs should be tied in with how expensive the character is and how many attacks it's got.
You would not want to buy a magic weapon for a 2 Attack Warrior Priest, for example, and with a 4 pt great weapon and 4 pts of heavy armour he's not exactly underpriced at a 103 pts.

I quite like how they've done it in the ogre book: mundane weapons are rather more expensive than in most other books and the magic weapons are quite affordable (a magic great weapon that does D3 wounds for 50 pts, for example).

An example of the opposite is the Orc & Goblin book, where the magic weapons are mostly crappy. You don't ever want a weapon that auto-wounds but does nothing special to armour saves, even if it did not cost 75(!) points. The weapon that knocks enemy characters out of units if you manage to wound them is also something you don't want at all, since you have to use it and it's so situational (not to mention that you are unlikely to do that wound, it's otherwise just a hand weapon).
In comparison the mundane weapons are additional hand weapons (which are pretty crappy on characters) or great weapons.

Guess what greenskin players tend to take!


So more thought put into magic weapons and mundane weapon costs adjusted according to the character is what I want.

Anyone knows how it is with the WE book? I know that at least they have forbidden GWs when mounted.

Cenyu
03-09-2005, 17:13
After re-reading your post and my post I scratch my head and ask myself why I posted this - I think basically we both share the same opinion.

I shouldn´t start to surf forums without a proper breakfast and a shower.

Scythe
04-09-2005, 11:08
Anyone knows how it is with the WE book? I know that at least they have forbidden GWs when mounted.

Sorry to dissapoint you, but they haven't exactly forbidden the use of great weapons when mounted. If your character is member of the Wild Rider kindred, you're stuck with a spear, true, but there's nothing that prevents your non-Wild Rider character from getting a normal elven steed and a great weapon, altough you can't join units of wild riders with these (but that's due the character lacking the forest spirit rule). Points are as low as always, great weapons costing 6 or 4 pts, respectively, while the magical items are nothing really special (the close combat weapons at least, bow of loren is pretty cool combined with magical arrows).