PDA

View Full Version : Special Characters for Special Armies?



bhusus
16-11-2007, 05:35
I was wondering if anyone else had a problem with the way special armies are being treated in the sense that you have to take a special character to 'unlock' them. For instance, with the DW you now have to take Belial (I think) to be able to use the Deathwing or for the Orks (if the rumours are to be believed) it is necessary to take a special character warboss to unleash what used to be a speed freeks army (the all-bike version). I know this was even done for the Lustria campaign especially on the Skaven side where it was necessary to take a 575 point hero to play the army. My questions to others:
What is the purpose of this do you think? Do you have to spend a certain amount of points to get access to these armies? If this is the case would it be acceptable to spend the same amount of points on your own home-made character to 'unlock' these lists? I'm not a fan of special characters as their histories mean nothing to me; I'd much prefer playing a normal Warboss or Mekboss (whatever its called) on a bike instead or if the points don't add up, make my own character. I'm also curious as to where people stand on this issue - an army that used to be fielded without special characters now requires one to play...and the reasoning escapes me...I know my brother, who I play against the most, won't care if I don't use the character but would others mind? Not that I'm gonna play any of you really, but I am curious...

PumaKiller
16-11-2007, 06:28
I'm pretty sure most people in a pick up game at say a local GW would have a problem with you say using Deathwing Terminators as troops with no Belial in the army (and yes you need Belial to take Termies as troops and Sammael to take Bikes as troops in the DA Codex). For me personally though I probably wouldn't mind. I play the Ravenwing as well so have to take Sammael but I really don't mind since none of the other Bike choices in the Codex really appeal to me and lets face it, look at his model. However were I to play Orks having to take a special character for a Speed Freak list would bother me. Honestly I think making up the history for your own Warboss and then theming the army would be the most enjoyable aspect of making an Ork army for me.

Maleagant
16-11-2007, 06:42
I think GW should revise the guidelines for creating your own chapter master...that gave a little personality to your army. It'd also go good with their new company master mini's as well!

[SD] Bob Plisskin
16-11-2007, 06:44
Honestly I think making up the history for your own Warboss and then theming the army would be the most enjoyable aspect of making an Ork army for me.

You still can do, he just has to have the same in game effect as the special character.

Kasonic
16-11-2007, 08:33
I don't see the big deal...GW reiterates over and over again that you can rename the special characters and use them as you see fit.

He's doesn't have to be Belial, he can be Generic Deathwing Master #34. I think the DA book specifically has a paragraph that you can write your own fluff for your -Wing leaders.

Mort
16-11-2007, 08:34
What is the purpose of this do you think?

I Think it appeals more to younger gamers-lets face the truth,everybody of us has been playing with action figures as a kid,and i think to bring the special characters back to the ramplight is a way of bringing youbg players the hobby-which is not a bad thing,just a way of marketing....

Bornhald
16-11-2007, 08:46
hmm i was seeing it as some sort of balancing thing.

to "unlock" a specific mode you need a specific character..

though i would like it more if it were some upgrade or something you had to purcase the special ability and be able to use it with a generic leader..

Renagade
16-11-2007, 09:07
maybe I'm a cynic, but i think it's also a good way of selling higher priced models:angel:

marv335
16-11-2007, 09:34
maybe I'm a cynic, but i think it's also a good way of selling higher priced models:angel:
well there is no Belial model, so no.
but in the larger picture, the whole game is about selling models.
Even Warmachine (who some people seem to think can do no wrong) is about selling expensive models. Centurion anyone?
;)

Eulenspiegel
16-11-2007, 10:45
The incorporation of Special Characters into the main armylist is bugging me since it became official with Codex: Eldar (I think it was).

It hit me full with the stand-in Codex: Blood Angels from White Dwarf. If I want a "big" Chaplain or Librarian, it´s going to be Lemartes or Mephiston respectively. I don´t like Special Characters, because their equipment is always fixed. Also it feels wrong to play with the very same Character thousands of other people are playing ... I can´t explain it but somehow it doesn´t feel right.

With Orks *rumouredly* it will not be too hard: my Speedfreaks can still be done without the Biker Special Char: Boyz in Trukks for troops, maybe even Bike-Nobz (which the Warboss will allow), then one or two Bike squads as Fast. Should work nicely. Only downside will be that my Warbuggies maybe will have to be arranged in a single unit.

My Tzeentch got off lightly - Ahriman is far from compulsory (or even worth it, but that´s another topic).

I fear for my Imperial Guard army. But then again it has rather basic doctrines, wich might be represented by the basic armylist, without Special Characters.

I really rather had them printing the Special "Named" Characters in a seperate section of the army list. Nothing about "opponents consent", just to show they are different, and to have a fully functional armylist without them.
(Yes they may be functional without them, but they are missing something. Look Blood Angels and Dark Angels.)

UltimateNagash
16-11-2007, 11:28
I don't mind at all... but that's just me...
Personally, I don't see the Deathwing/Ravenwing going all out anyway, unless one of their leaders is there...
Same as any other Company...

Meh...

The_Outsider
16-11-2007, 12:50
Special chatacters: Nemesis to those without imagination.

TheLionReturns
16-11-2007, 12:52
I was wondering if anyone else had a problem with the way special armies are being treated in the sense that you have to take a special character to 'unlock' them. For instance, with the DW you now have to take Belial (I think) to be able to use the Deathwing

Generally I would agree that I don't like the idea of being forced into taking special characters to play a certain army. However, I think it is important to note that Belial isn't really a special character. He is a terminator armour version of a chapter master, only distinguished by a master crafted weapon and the deathwing as troops rule. I can see maybe the temptation of a Terminator Librarian or Chaplain leading such a force. I know the more modern fluff doesn't view things in this way but I've always seen librarians and chaplains as more support officers anyway, so its always felt natural to have Belial leading the deathwing army for me. As for Sammael however, i concede he is quite unique and perhaps falls more into the issue you are mentioning.



It hit me full with the stand-in Codex: Blood Angels from White Dwarf. If I want a "big" Chaplain or Librarian, it´s going to be Lemartes or Mephiston respectively. I don´t like Special Characters, because their equipment is always fixed. Also it feels wrong to play with the very same Character thousands of other people are playing ... I can´t explain it but somehow it doesn´t feel right.

I think we have to take a slightly different view with Space marines as we do other armies. Lemartes and Mephiston are set up to be the big Chaplains and Librarians of the chapter with the inference they are the only ones of that standing. Space Marine Chapters are such small organisations that your command options are likely to be named. After all how many company masters are there in a chapter. Also if a thousand people are playing Dark Angels surely we should have one marine each if we follow that logic. We are simulating individual engagements, not playing a part in an actual war for humanity.

With all this said, most other armies you can choose come from races with massive populations. I have not read the new Ork codex but if it is true than you need a special character to take a speed freaks list this seems rather strange to me and I would be totally opposed to it. Whilst certain named characters may have their own fighting style and give access to special lists Speed Freaks have been part of the fluff as long as i can remember and I was under the impression they were not a small splinter group of orks but a cult repeated in many theatres of battle.

bhusus
16-11-2007, 14:17
To be fair the ork part I heard is based on a post in the rumour section but the guy seems to have been fairly accurate as far as I know and nothing from his post seems far-fetched. My problem with special characters lies exactly with the fact that they have special rules that no one else can get and I'm not really for that, unless its something based on a campaign I am playing. I'm not a power-gamer by any means and therefore I'm loathe to include rules that are too beneficial (I used to be a Salamander's player back when that meant something).


Special chatacters: Nemesis to those without imagination.

This is the only comment I didn't follow - you're suggesting special characters are a negative factor for those people without imagination, whereas I would say the exact opposite; special characters limit the imaginations of players to come up with their own characters and they ignore regular rules by creating new ones that no others can get. This last part isn't always a big deal as long as its play-tested but I'm personally not a fan of having to play GW's latest conception of what is cool/great/amazing, rather than my own.

EVIL INC
16-11-2007, 15:16
I think of it as an "unlocking". In order to use the list, you have to pay a certain ammount of points for a character to lead them. That is ok and nothing wrong with it as it can be seen as a balence issue.
The special character as has been said does not have to be the one the model is called. Just switch the name and make the character a captain or some such in your particuler army who happens to be an exceptional warrier who is moving through the ranks and may one day aspire to master staus. The same could be with speed freaks, a nob who is aspiring to become a boss.
So I have no problem with the armies needing to be unlocked.

Grand Warlord
16-11-2007, 15:24
Outside of Sammael/Belial for a true DW/RW the only special character I use consistently use is Ahriman.

I have no problem with my opponent using special characters.

Edit: If more of the special characters were requiring asking of permission to use them then I might have more of a problem, but since more are ok to take from the beginning ... I don't worry about it.

But i can understand the pov on both sides.

Malazan
16-11-2007, 15:31
I have no problem with my opponent using special characters.

Well done. This is the most sense I've read so far.

bhusus
16-11-2007, 15:35
Yes but in this case the point is I, the one who plans on playing the army (in other words, the opponent) do have a problem with playing special characters - I have no problems with others using them. Like I said its not the points cost (I don't even know what it is yet) so much as the preset character including all the toys - the idea of changing the name is not an issue - its still a preset character that I don't want.

EVIL INC
16-11-2007, 15:48
If you want to make your own special characters to lead your special army, feel free to ask your opponant in friendly or pick up games if they care or not. Just know that they have the right to say no and not play you. Just understand that the balence will be different if you show up with a cheesy replacement character that acts differently and serves a different role in the army then the army was designed to have. Likewise, if you show up with a bare bones weakling one in order to have the extra points to buy extra troops will alter the concept of the special army a different way. Either way, you are altering the balence of the army in a way that it was not intended to be altered for personal benifit rather then anything to do with the idea of a special character.
The idea of the special army is that it is meant to be SPECIAL. If any old tom dick or harry (in the 40k universe) could have and lead them, then the army would not be so special anymore. The concept each of those armies have is that they have weaknesses as well as advantages only, a special type of person would use them. Others would think them mad or would be jealous because they dont have the resources to do it themselves. It is neccessary within the fluff of the game to make it neccessary that only a character that "fit the bill" or had particuler attributes would lead those armies. The only things that would/could be altered would be something minor like weaponry. For example one day he might carry his bolt pistal and another his plasma. One day, his powersword and another his powerfist. Those things are minor and petty enough in the scale of playing a game that only a petty player would throw a fit over it as it really is not that big of a deal. Hell, if you were playing a friendly with me and asked if a character could use a powerfist instead of a powersword, I would likely tell you "sure go ahead, just add the extra points to make the difference up".

Eulenspiegel
16-11-2007, 16:30
The idea of the special army is that it is meant to be SPECIAL. If any old tom dick or harry (in the 40k universe) could have and lead them, then the army would not be so special anymore. (...)
I see what you mean, Evil Incorporated, but please quote me something along the lines of "Deathwing never deployes without Belial", "Sammael leads every Ravenwing detachment there is." or "All Bike-heavy Ork armies across the galaxy are being led by Wazzdakka" from any fluff source please ;)

I´m fully aware that you may rename those sods. This is something that annoys me to no end ... well nevermind, the equipment still stays the same. Every Ork bike army is being led by a Mekboy that luckily invented that bike with that peculiar gun that can shoot while turbo-boosting?

THIS is where I feel the codex-simplification most, not as other people with the wargear. Now every other army of the same faction is being led by the same PERSON.



Edit:

Well done. This is the most sense I've read so far.
And your reply is among the most irrelevant I´ve ever read, because even the post you´re quoting is beside the point.
This thread is about opinions. And as it is always with questions about an opinion, the politically correct ethic minority always stops by to show how morally superior they are.
Nobody said they´d not play an army with a special character. This discussion HERE is about what we´d prefer. At least it is for me.

Cry of the Wind
16-11-2007, 16:42
I think we have to take a slightly different view with Space marines as we do other armies. Lemartes and Mephiston are set up to be the big Chaplains and Librarians of the chapter with the inference they are the only ones of that standing. Space Marine Chapters are such small organisations that your command options are likely to be named. After all how many company masters are there in a chapter. Also if a thousand people are playing Dark Angels surely we should have one marine each if we follow that logic. We are simulating individual engagements, not playing a part in an actual war for humanity.

With all this said, most other armies you can choose come from races with massive populations. I have not read the new Ork codex but if it is true than you need a special character to take a speed freaks list this seems rather strange to me and I would be totally opposed to it. Whilst certain named characters may have their own fighting style and give access to special lists Speed Freaks have been part of the fluff as long as i can remember and I was under the impression they were not a small splinter group of orks but a cult repeated in many theatres of battle.

QFT


When it comes to armies like marines I can understand why you might need a certain character to 'unlock' a unit, the post by TheLionReturns sums it up nicely, the only time you'll see mass deployment of certain units would be under their commander and because the codexes are written in a contemporary time frame in the 40k universe those people have names.

As for other armies needing to do so, well Eldar don't need to have any special character to 'unlock' special formations and I would hope the ork book is the same (is this issue still a rumour...I thought enough people would have seen the book by now to confirm it or not).

I could see some reason if the army wasn't a standard ork formation, but if it is speed freaks I'd be a little disappointed. Basically my view is this: If you are using a standard army formation that is commonly used throughout the race than a special character is not needed. If however the army/unit is more of a one off thing (like the Deathwing/Lysanderwing/Ravenwing/Shrikes Guard/Last Chancers/Farsight Enclave/etc...) than I can understand the need for a special character to be required for its use.

The argument that "well maybe mine own home grown character might have made the same unit/army" seems kind of weak to me. After all my character has a pack of tamed gene-stealers so why can't he use them in his light infantry Imperial Guard :rolleyes: (and don't say Apoc because I can't play those every game all the time)? It just seems to be a choice for the gamer to accept that a particular army has a requirement either because of balance or the GW fluff (since it has limits unlike our own imaginations, e.g. only Farsight Tau fight hand-to-hand but your own home grown sept might follow a similar fighting style led by Shas'O Joe who happens to have a power field that he can use to deflect shots and cut through things with).

Grand Warlord
16-11-2007, 16:45
Yes but in this case the point is I, the one who plans on playing the army (in other words, the opponent) do have a problem with playing special characters - I have no problems with others using them. Like I said its not the points cost (I don't even know what it is yet) so much as the preset character including all the toys - the idea of changing the name is not an issue - its still a preset character that I don't want.

Ok, between work and uh "researching" on the internet ... i think i misunderstood the original post, sorry :)

I may have to reword my 1st post after work.

bhusus
16-11-2007, 17:56
I see what you mean, Evil Incorporated, but please quote me something along the lines of "Deathwing never deployes without Belial", "Sammael leads every Ravenwing detachment there is." or "All Bike-heavy Ork armies across the galaxy are being led by Wazzdakka" from any fluff source please ;)

I´m fully aware that you may rename those sods. This is something that annoys me to no end ... well nevermind, the equipment still stays the same. Every Ork bike army is being led by a Mekboy that luckily invented that bike with that peculiar gun that can shoot while turbo-boosting?

THIS is where I feel the codex-simplification most, not as other people with the wargear. Now every other army of the same faction is being led by the same PERSON.

Edit:

And your reply is among the most irrelevant I´ve ever read, because even the post you´re quoting is beside the point.
This thread is about opinions. And as it is always with questions about an opinion, the politically correct ethic minority always stops by to show how morally superior they are.
Nobody said they´d not play an army with a special character. This discussion HERE is about what we´d prefer. At least it is for me.


And yes this is an opinion post; technically there is no wrong or right - I was just curious as to where others stood on this issue - as I originally mentioned my brother and I will likely ignore the whole special character thing and I'll just play the army...

EVIL INC
16-11-2007, 17:59
Eulenspiegel, I understand what you mean. Ideally, you would not be using the deathwing (just an example) for every game. This is because the deathwing would not neccessarily be fighting in every battle. and while units from the deathwing or members of it might fight in battles as part of another army, they would not be deploys AS the deathwing in every one. The hope is that you make a dark angels army and switch off between the different parts of it. When deployed AS the deathwing, it is possible he might lead it every time.
The idea is for balence and fluff. I agree, it would be better to have it possible to personalize the "unlocking key" to a point beyond a mere rename (although stuff like the special extra ability rules and such I think should remain) but I think that that would make it too complicated for thier taste with the simplification of the rules and add in more variables then they neccesarily want to add.
In essense, I agree with you up to a point (the point being to make them a lil more customizable) but understand why they did not want to go that route.

Inquisitor Fitz
16-11-2007, 18:20
While I dont usually use special charaters, to me beial is essentially a master in terminator armour and can sport different wargear options depending on how you want to use him. I think that as long as the 'leader of the formation' is at least slightly customisable i dont mind.If they just dropped the name from the decription it then becomes as if they were an standed hq option.
my only problem with the speed freak character would be if he offered no options.

Necrontyr
16-11-2007, 18:53
Think of it from a fluff point, There is one Dark Angels chapter, with 10 companies. There are 10 Captains, 1 for each company. If you are going to take the first company on it's own, it would b led by it's captain, Belial. Same with the second company. The 3rd through 10th are left anonymous so you can make up your own. I think it makes sense.

bhusus
16-11-2007, 18:56
I agree that it makes more sense for the DA or the BA or those other armies - I don't agree that it makes sense for Orks

The_Outsider
16-11-2007, 20:04
This is the only comment I didn't follow - you're suggesting special characters are a negative factor for those people without imagination, whereas I would say the exact opposite; special characters limit the imaginations of players to come up with their own characters and they ignore regular rules by creating new ones that no others can get. This last part isn't always a big deal as long as its play-tested but I'm personally not a fan of having to play GW's latest conception of what is cool/great/amazing, rather than my own.

Depending on perspective it goes both ways.

What I said has no meaning really - some people enjoy having to take belial to get their deathwing - named characters add a feeling of importance to ones army.

No where (to my knowledge) it states anything other than he leads the DW so its not like one is restricting themselves by taking him (ok, other than the obvious DW restirctions).

Others feel caged in by having to use GW's high and mighty lords/bosses/whatever to get their ideal force.

Its easy to feel if the force you play isn't your own to command, its fate is already written.


While to both one could say "chill man its only a game" this hobby isn't a simple as that.

Ronin_eX
16-11-2007, 20:41
I agree that it makes more sense for the DA or the BA or those other armies - I don't agree that it makes sense for Orks

Actually I think Wazdakka has the upside of being a pretty good generic boss with some perks that he would work very well as a "counts as" boss with a beefy bike. They could have just called him Red Sunz Boss or Speed Freak Boss but instead they used the name of a prominent Speed Freak character. In the end it is just a unit name and you can really call it whatever you want. Essentially you are giving up the option of customizing for getting certain perks (the wargear and the ability to take bikes as troops).

This trade off seems to be to crux of the new designs, the really good stuff can't be put on custom characters (thus you aren't able to combine all the best stuff to make an uber-character) but it is present in small doses on named characters (which can be renamed and given custom fluff). So you can either customize and get a well rounded character or you can pick one of the more expensive ones if you want to get the top level wargear.

As for the person above who wanted to here examples of the Deathwing and Ravenwing deploying without their respective Masters. It hasn't ever happened. On the plains world Cloud Runner was the present Captain in the story (thus the same effective rank as Belial) and commanded the 30 Deathwing to battle. On Rynn's World Sammael led a force of Ravenwing against the green tide. Those two events are the only time either company has been deployed by themselves. The Dark Angels deploy mostly in mixed formations to take advantage of their strengths, pure formations are exceedingly rare.

And another not for those who dislike using Sammael in Successors due to him having the "last" jetbike. It never once states it is the only jetbike left. It says that the technology is "nigh extinct" and that the other Masters of the Successor chapters may have them as well. I've scoured the entry and it never says he possesses the only one left. So using the jetbike version for you Master is just fine by the written background.

Named characters really aren't so bad in the end and in many cases are just as fluffy and characterful as anything you could make yourself (for instance Belial lacks a model and as such every player's Belial will be different in some way). About all you can really get hung up on is set equipment which, I guess, is your own prerogative but in the end that doesn't make them inherently less fluffy than Space Marine Commander Bob. Just as with any unit you add character to your own models, whether they also have some additional fluff is meaningless in the end (are Deathwing less fluffy than normal Terminators because they have a story written about them?) because you can still build on that or come up with your own (if you give the character a different name).

In the end using a named character is your own choice but I think the stigma on them has lasted long enough. You aren't inherently unimaginative just for using one just as you aren't inherently imaginative for using an unnamed character (as there are so many examples of cookie-cutter net-list characters that I almost sometimes think the opposite is closer to the truth myself ;)).