PDA

View Full Version : Reimagining an OOP 40K Race



Easy E
02-12-2005, 04:34
Greetings,

I have been working on a Codex: Squats revision. However, I have taken inspiration from Hollywood and decided that they required a bit of "Reimagining". A direct copy and paste would not be sufficient, playable, or desirable in 4th edition. Here I will list the new army lists. I have all ready started a thread for the background:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17957

Please take a look at both the list and the background and let me know what you think. C & C is craved.

Regards.

Edit: I have updated the list to the most current versions.

Easy E
02-12-2005, 04:35
Sorry for the double posts, but here is the Wargear list. Keep in mind a lot of the color commentary has been removed, and generally just the game effects are in place, with minimal "fluff" elements written in for the wargear.

Edit: I have updated the link to the most current version.

Agamemnon2
02-12-2005, 10:31
A few things that pop into mind.

- The Living Ancestor has 4 wounds, but with his T2 he will be instakilled by bolters

- I'm not sure if you need the separate table for the Bore Miner, couldn't it use the normal reserve rolls, with a -1?

- Guild Armsmen seem a bit superfluous, they could be rolled into the Clansman entry.

- Thunderers scare the willies out of me. I'm sure any Tyranid or Ork players coming across them would feel the same. a 15-man unit with 5 heavy bolters is quite a formidable Troops choice indeed.

- The gyrocopter should probably always have at least one weapon.

- The Graviton Gun is pointless, a meltagun already has AP1 which means it ignores all and any armor saves anyway.

Puffin Magician
02-12-2005, 11:58
Mmm, Squats! I'm fine with using the IG Codex for a proxy, but homemade rules are always a good read. Thanks for not uploading stupid .doc files, which my computer refuses to read for some reason.

Miners and Engineer squads are similar enough to not really need seperate entries. I'd differentiate them more, or combine them into a generic "Battle Engineer" unit.

The Engineers gaining +1 AP is only useful if they charge a Fortification or shoot at stuff with a Meltagun. Maybe give them all Meltabombs as standard [rather than a +120pt upgrade] for a lower price, drop the +1AP for vehicles but keep it for Fortifications and Obstacles. They could also only trigger Minefields on a roll of 6.

For Miners maybe have them only Deep Strike, but even if the mission doesn't allow it. I can see their arrival on the battlefield not unlike the Tyranid Trygon. I don't agree that either squad should have the option of BP & CCWs, that's what Berzerkers are for!

I'm glad you went through the trouble of adding the Termite, although it shouldn't be immobile once on the surface. It has little tracks on the back as well as rocket jets for rudimentary steering and movement. How else would it re-enter thr ground after surfacing?

Currently you're paying 100pts and you're getting less than a Drop Pod, which costs 30pts. I'd make some special rules that allow it to keep "Deep Striking", though you'd have to make such actions risky and with deadly consequences. I'd also slap an Auto-Launcher on there [coaxial grenade launcher], to match the Epic stats.

I'd reduce the number of Heavy Weapons available to Thunderers to 3, or limit the weapons so we don't have 3 units of 5 Missile Launchers counting as a manditory Troops unit.

Perhaps allow the Iron Eagle Gyrocopter to have 2 weapons, or 1 twinlinked weapon. The Epic models seems closer in size to a Valkyrie than a Land Speeder.

I'm a bit iffy on the "Troop unit + Transport = Fast Attack unit" idea, especially in an army reknowned to be a stunted wall of stubborn firepower. I don't mind if my Warrior Brotherhoods need to walk all the time.

Drop the F&K option for Support Weapon squads... just no point. And some of their stats... if you make them from scratch [ie: not simply renaming an existing weapon], I think they should be accurate to their 2nd Edition incarnation. The description is vague; 3 Clansmen can crew a single weapon, so a squad of 15 men for one gun? Or 3 Clansmen can crew their own gun, so a squad of 15 men for 3 guns? Either way it's a big fleshy bodyguard for something that shouldn't move at all during the game.

Automatons are a nice idea but the Heavy Support choices are too competative. I wouldn't give up some Robots or Trikes to field what are essentially Killa Kans. IMO Automatons are small human-sized robots, so would be a Troops or Elites choice with a tougher-than-average statline.

I think there should be some sort of Space Marine [or at least IG] vehicle as Heavy Support. I think Squats should have Land Raiders.

Graviton Gun: Make it pinning, and the roll to hit is the same as the target's armour. Terminators on a 2+, etc. Walkers & Fast vehicles: 5+, Tanks: 4+, Structures & War Machines: 3+. More 2nd Edition goodness!

No Overlord Airship? Cyclops Titankiller? Land Train? :(

Easy E
06-12-2005, 00:07
A few things that pop into mind.

- The Living Ancestor has 4 wounds, but with his T2 he will be instakilled by bolters

- I'm not sure if you need the separate table for the Bore Miner, couldn't it use the normal reserve rolls, with a -1?

- Guild Armsmen seem a bit superfluous, they could be rolled into the Clansman entry.

- Thunderers scare the willies out of me. I'm sure any Tyranid or Ork players coming across them would feel the same. a 15-man unit with 5 heavy bolters is quite a formidable Troops choice indeed.

- The gyrocopter should probably always have at least one weapon.

- The Graviton Gun is pointless, a meltagun already has AP1 which means it ignores all and any armor saves anyway.

I will respond in the order received:

- Woops, I didn't catch that.

- I will change the Bore Miner to the normal reserve chart.

- Guild Armsman are different as they begin with bolters, can have shotguns, and are equipped with two heavy weapons. More importantly, they are required if a person would like to field a full Guild Army per the special Army Structure Rules.

- Would it be better to reduce the number of heavy weapons, or the size of the accompanying squad?

- Yes, it should. Silly typo.

- I see. Perhaps I should make the save for the Graviton Gun incumbant on the size of the target. For example, the target must make a save, and if it is passed, the target is immobilized. Therefore, larger targets such as Termies are easier to immobilze then guardsman. Against vehicles it will still function as a Melta-gun.

Easy E
06-12-2005, 00:41
Mmm, Squats! I'm fine with using the IG Codex for a proxy, but homemade rules are always a good read. Thanks for not uploading stupid .doc files, which my computer refuses to read for some reason.

Your welcome. I hate that also.


Miners and Engineer squads are similar enough to not really need seperate entries. I'd differentiate them more, or combine them into a generic "Battle Engineer" unit.

The Engineers gaining +1 AP is only useful if they charge a Fortification or shoot at stuff with a Meltagun. Maybe give them all Meltabombs as standard [rather than a +120pt upgrade] for a lower price, drop the +1AP for vehicles but keep it for Fortifications and Obstacles. They could also only trigger Minefields on a roll of 6.

For Miners maybe have them only Deep Strike, but even if the mission doesn't allow it. I can see their arrival on the battlefield not unlike the Tyranid Trygon. I don't agree that either squad should have the option of BP & CCWs, that's what Berzerkers are for!.

I feel that miners and engineers should be distinct units. I agree that changing Miners to always be able to Deepstrike and removing Infiltrators will help.

Engineers come equipped with Krak grenades for busting vehicles and bunkers as standard. I think I will reduce the price of Melta-Bombs for them. I also like your idea about minefields.

I can see getting rid of the BL & CCW option, but what about a shotgun upgrade? That would give them an assault element.


I'm glad you went through the trouble of adding the Termite, although it shouldn't be immobile once on the surface. It has little tracks on the back as well as rocket jets for rudimentary steering and movement. How else would it re-enter thr ground after surfacing?

Currently you're paying 100pts and you're getting less than a Drop Pod, which costs 30pts. I'd make some special rules that allow it to keep "Deep Striking", though you'd have to make such actions risky and with deadly consequences. I'd also slap an Auto-Launcher on there [coaxial grenade launcher], to match the Epic stats.

Well, I don't want it to be a direct port as a Termite. Like I said, this is a re-imagining. I wanted to make them similar to Drop Pods in use, but also limit the mobility of the army. Perhaps +100 pts. is too steep. What do you think about +50 pts? I feel multiple uses would harm the image of a somewhat immobile army.


I'd reduce the number of Heavy Weapons available to Thunderers to 3, or limit the weapons so we don't have 3 units of 5 Missile Launchers counting as a manditory Troops unit.

Is this unit that much "harder" than a space marine devastator squad? Is it the number of heavy weapons or the number of meatshields in the unit. I was thinking of reducing it to a 10 man squad with 5 heavy weapons. Of course, this is a troop squad, but it is limited to three units of them. Somehow I feel that 3 heavy weapons just doesn't make it very impressive as a Thunderer squad. Orks get three assault weapons!


Perhaps allow the Iron Eagle Gyrocopter to have 2 weapons, or 1 twinlinked weapon. The Epic models seems closer in size to a Valkyrie than a Land Speeder.

Again, I don't want this to be a direct port from Epic or 1st edition. i feel that the Iron Eagles are actually larger multi-person vehicles, where the ones promoted in the list are smaller 1 man units used for recon and search/destroy missions.


I'm a bit iffy on the "Troop unit + Transport = Fast Attack unit" idea, especially in an army reknowned to be a stunted wall of stubborn firepower. I don't mind if my Warrior Brotherhoods need to walk all the time.

I see your point here. However, due to the army structure rules, I feel that some mobility is needed to make the list competitive. This technique is used in the LaTD list. In addition, it is limited to 2 units, and Fast Attack slots only.


Drop the F&K option for Support Weapon squads... just no point. And some of their stats... if you make them from scratch [ie: not simply renaming an existing weapon], I think they should be accurate to their 2nd Edition incarnation. The description is vague; 3 Clansmen can crew a single weapon, so a squad of 15 men for one gun? Or 3 Clansmen can crew their own gun, so a squad of 15 men for 3 guns? Either way it's a big fleshy bodyguard for something that shouldn't move at all during the game.

I will try to clarify this. It is 1 clansmen to field one support weapon up to three support weapons in the squad. I will reduce the meatshields down to 10. As for the Frag and Krak, there is very little point, unless they are attacked in cc by a dread (Krak). However, I feel that a Brotherhood would try and keep standardized options available to the entire force. No one has to actually chose the option.


Automatons are a nice idea but the Heavy Support choices are too competative. I wouldn't give up some Robots or Trikes to field what are essentially Killa Kans. IMO Automatons are small human-sized robots, so would be a Troops or Elites choice with a tougher-than-average statline.

Hmmm? Yes, the heavy Support Options are competitive. That makse sense to me in this list. However, Killa Kans are one of the most popular choices in the Ork army. These also work great in smaller point games. Any suggestions for a different unit name? I agree that it is a bit off.


I think there should be some sort of Space Marine [or at least IG] vehicle as Heavy Support. I think Squats should have Land Raiders.

Again, as part of the re-imagining I wanted to get away from so many Imperial vehicles. In addition, I wanted to keep there mobility reduced. Do you think that a Land Raider would be a competitive choice in a Heavy Support slot?


Graviton Gun: Make it pinning, and the roll to hit is the same as the target's armour. Terminators on a 2+, etc. Walkers & Fast vehicles: 5+, Tanks: 4+, Structures & War Machines: 3+. More 2nd Edition goodness!

That's a fantastic idea. Consider it done!



No Overlord Airship? Cyclops Titankiller? Land Train? :(

This is designed to be a 40K 4th edition scale Codex. I'll save those for the Forgeworld update:D

Thanks for the great feedback guys, I'll try and get those updates in there tonight.

Puffin Magician
06-12-2005, 01:37
I think restricting some options for the Miners and/or Engineers would make them more individualistic. The Engineers having special siege rules [the Obstacles and Minefields thing], and Miners arriving via tunnels is good, but allowing them to have nearly identical weapon options is something I disagree with.

• Engineers: Bolters, Krak or Melta [why take both], options for Plasma & Grenade Launcher, +1 AP vs. Obstacles, only triggers a minefield on a 6.
• Miners: Shotguns, Frag, CCW, options for Flamer & Melta, may always Deep Strike.

How's that? I dropped Bolters for the Miners completely since, if they're going to Deep Strike, they should have some short-range guns to blast at things near their exit point. If, however, you'd rather stick with your "infiltrating Anvil" idea [which I like], give them back Infiltrate instead of the tunnels, and give them their Bolters again. They'll need a better weapon to hold their position.


Yes, the Heavy Support Options are competitive. That makes sense to me in this list. However, Killa Kans are one of the most popular choices in the Ork army. These also work great in smaller point games.
Killa Kans are popular for Orks because they spit out a lot of firepower, which is required when you've only got Bs2. As a unit of 3, they're better than the Ork Dreadnought at both shooting and assaults, and absorb more hits [thanks to numbers] for not-too-many-more points.

Having another look at the units, I could get a wannabe Dreadnought [Robot w/ Powerfist, Twinlinked Autocannon] for a measly 77pts. I'd pay 150% of that on a basic unit of Automatons. I don't think many IG players would take Sentinels if they ate up a Heavy Support choice, and that's basically what we've got here. I like the units, but I'd be hard pressed to take one when I like Robots, Support Weapons and Trikes just a wee bit more.


Any suggestions for a different unit name? I agree that it is a bit off.
I dunno, Automatons/Androids sounds fine with me. Maybe a name similar to the Robot classes?


Do you think that a Land Raider would be a competitive choice in a Heavy Support slot?
Well you've got me there... maybe as a Transport for the Warlord & Hearthguard Retinue? :p


Like I said ...Again, ...Again, ...
Okay, I get the idea. I'm just used to "importing" other races into 4th Edition by making them as similar as possible to their 2nd Ed. 40k / Epic40k lists. It's good to want different things!

I should point out that the Graviton Gun idea is knicked from [IIRC] the 2nd Edition rules, and Tim Huckleberry's reinterpretation in his 3rd Edition Adeptus Mechanicus Codex.

Easy E
06-12-2005, 02:20
Engineers: Bolters, Krak or Melta [why take both], options for Plasma & Grenade Launcher, +1 AP vs. Obstacles, only triggers a minefield on a 6.
Miners: Shotguns, Frag, CCW, options for Flamer & Melta, may always Deep Strike.

This seems reasonable. Your comment about Krak versus Melta is very true. I still like the idea of Engineers having a +1 ap versus vehicles as well. They are familiar with machines and would know where to hurt them.

Shotguns versus Bolters. I am torn. The Shotgun seems very fluffy. However, the bolter as a rapid fire weapon seems more effective for an elite unit. Especially one that is Deep Striking and therefore can not assault. I would probably want to reduce the points for the Miners as well if they have shotguns.


Killa Kans are popular for Orks because they spit out a lot of firepower, which is required when you've only got Bs2. As a unit of 3, they're better than the Ork Dreadnought at both shooting and assaults, and absorb more hits [thanks to numbers] for not-too-many-more points.

Having another look at the units, I could get a wannabe Dreadnought [Robot w/ Powerfist, Twinlinked Autocannon] for a measly 77pts. I'd pay 150% of that on a basic unit of Automatons. I don't think many IG players would take Sentinels if they ate up a Heavy Support choice, and that's basically what we've got here. I like the units, but I'd be hard pressed to take one when I like Robots, Support Weapons and Trikes just a wee bit more.

Great analysis. I hadn't thought of it that way at all. Does this call for a points reduction, or a move to a different part of the Force Org. I'm not sure they fit anywhere else, and if I place them in Elites, their are a lot of competitive choices there all ready. However, there is no way they can be fast attack or troops.

What about the squad sizes for Thunderers or Support Weapon Squads. Would 10 thunderers with 5 heavy weapons be to over-powering? Is 4 heavy weapons more realistic? How about 10 clansmen in a support weapon squad, is that too many or too few?

Puffin Magician
06-12-2005, 02:33
I think the Automatons would be more competative if they did something that the Robot didn't. If one is mostly choppy, make the others shooty. I guess you could give the Dreadnought a CCW + 2 manditory weapons rather than one Twinlinked, making it more expensive and the Automats a cheaper, more attractive option.

For the Thunderers, perhaps allow 1 heavy weapon for every 3 models in the squad? It's just that I'd rather remove any possibility of minmaxy powergaming right from the start. No 8-man units with 5 Heavy Weapons for me, thanks.


It is 1 clansmen to field one support weapon up to three support weapons in the squad. I will reduce the meatshields down to 10.
So a squad of 10, up to 6 can be made into weapon teams [so up to 3 guns], with a Clansmen leading the unit? I suggest tinkering with the wording to make it sound like an IG Heavy Weapon Platoon; "Clansmen may access the armoury, squad size of 6-10, up to 6 models can be paired up into a weapon team and given one of the following weapons: ...".


As for the Frag and Krak, there is very little point, unless they are attacked in cc by a dread (Krak). However, I feel that a Brotherhood would try and keep standardized options available to the entire force. No one has to actually chose the option.
They don't, you're right, but I see grenades as an offensive weapon, and if you're charged by a Dreadnought just shoot the danged Rapier Lasers at it!

Easy E
06-12-2005, 03:01
I think the Automatons would be more competative if they did something that the Robot didn't. If one is mostly choppy, make the others shooty. I guess you could give the Dreadnought a CCW + 2 manditory weapons rather than one Twinlinked, making it more expensive and the Automats a cheaper, more attractive option.

What about if I give them a Guildsman control, which allows them to charge into hand-to-hand. This is something that the Robot can not currently do? Of course, the Guildsman control would be vulnerable.

Alternatively, I could remove the power fist from the robot and give it a pair of twin-linked weapons. Then the Automatons would be able to fend off a close assault better than a Robot.


For the Thunderers, perhaps allow 1 heavy weapon for every 3 models in the squad? It's just that I'd rather remove any possibility of minmaxy powergaming right from the start. No 8-man units with 5 Heavy Weapons for me, thanks.

Good point. I would also like to reduce the min/maxing potential. How's this wording? "Up to 1 clansmen per 3 members of the squad may upgrade to a heavy weapon following cost:"


So a squad of 10, up to 6 can be made into weapon teams [so up to 3 guns], with a Clansmen leading the unit? I suggest tinkering with the wording to make it sound like an IG Heavy Weapon Platoon; "Clansmen may access the armoury, squad size of 6-10, up to 6 models can be paired up into a weapon team and given one of the following weapons: ...".

Is this clearer? "Up to 6 clansmen maybe formed into two man weapon teams to crew one of the following support weapons. The squad must have a squad leader. The support weapons have the following cost:"



They don't, you're right, but I see grenades as an offensive weapon, and if you're charged by a Dreadnought just shoot the danged Rapier Lasers at it!

I guess your right. I suppose the unit can always upgrade to a Hearthguard with some nasty kill-y thing if a player is too concerned about the close assault with dread possability.

Thanks for the great feedback! Have you perused the background stuff? I would love your imput there as I believe you also have knowledge of the Squats Epic background.

IncubiLord
06-12-2005, 04:05
A few of thoughts...

Great axe and hammer should probably change from "great" to something like relic, GW already made great weapons in Chaos.

Haywire grenades are also already in use by the Eldar and their evil kin. I think one of the other forces has EMP as well.

The Ancestor Lord (living ancestor) was a close combat god in 2nd ed. He could still be dangerous despite being slow.
Maybe he could have nasty powers like the Space Marine Librarian. And don't forget the force weapon.

Automotons could be a Fast Attack choice with the Scouts rule (see the IG sentinels)

And last.. Where are the exo-armor trikes? Those were some cool guys.

Easy E
06-12-2005, 04:32
A few of thoughts...

Great axe and hammer should probably change from "great" to something like relic, GW already made great weapons in Chaos.

Haywire grenades are also already in use by the Eldar and their evil kin. I think one of the other forces has EMP as well.

The Ancestor Lord (living ancestor) was a close combat god in 2nd ed. He could still be dangerous despite being slow.
Maybe he could have nasty powers like the Space Marine Librarian. And don't forget the force weapon.

Automotons could be a Fast Attack choice with the Scouts rule (see the IG sentinels)

And last.. Where are the exo-armor trikes? Those were some cool guys.

Thanks for your response. I need all the help I can get. I will respond in the order of posting:

I will gladly change the Great Axe and Great hammer to Axe of the Ancients and Hammer of the Stronghold. That should sort out that. Thanks for the advise.

Any suggestions for another name than haywire grenades? I can't think of anything at the moment.

The Living Ancestor was pretty bad a** in 2nd Edition. That was something I never understood. In mine I prefer to give him some strategic benefits and also some psychic powers. They are listed in the Wargear section which is in the second post. Check it out, I would love your feedback on those powers. I never thought about giving him a force weapon. I guess I wasn't familiar enough with them in 4th edition.

Auto-matons as fast attack and the scout options. Hum, basicly they would be similar to sentinels. I'm not sold on that idea, as the army in general is suppose to be relativley slow and defensive in nature.

Exo-armor Trikes were not included as I did not want a direct port from 1st and 2nd edition into this codex. In addition, I never liked the imagery of guys in huge bulky armor for tunnel fighting riding around like extras from the movie Torque. Undoubtedly, they were great in combat, but the image never did it for me. Hence, the battlemaster and retinue can get bikes, but not Exo-armor at the same time.

I appreciate the read comments and your time. I will make the changes I agreed to above. If you can tell me more about Force Weapons I would be grateful.

IncubiLord
06-12-2005, 05:17
Any suggestions for another name than haywire grenades? I can't think of anything at the moment.

The Living Ancestor was pretty bad a** in 2nd Edition. That was something I never understood. In mine I prefer to give him some strategic benefits and also some psychic powers. They are listed in the Wargear section which is in the second post. Check it out, I would love your feedback on those powers. I never thought about giving him a force weapon. I guess I wasn't familiar enough with them in 4th edition.

Auto-matons as fast attack and the scout options. Hum, basicly they would be similar to sentinels. I'm not sold on that idea, as the army in general is suppose to be relativley slow and defensive in nature.


I might consider calling them scrambler charges, but yeah, the good ones are taken.

Machine Curse looks nice, the dimensions of a Rock Wall should be given (MY Rock Wall is 3 ft. long...), Fortitude should be written 'until the beginning of the next clan turn..', and I wouldn't usually pay that much to take Ward of the Ancients-most the army has a 4+ save that pretty much every Heavy Weapon will negate. Also it needs the duration specified.
Force weapons (P46 of the rulebook) are power weapons-but if the psyker wounds a character, he can pass a leadership test to inflict Instant Death. This counts as a psychic power for the turn.

I thought a slow moving Fast Attack choice was perfect. They always get to deplay and get a free move, but they still don't fly across the table. They should be able to assault if there's a squat close enough to order it (12 inches or so), and they could be given special weapons instead of heavies (they are smaller).

Puffin Magician
06-12-2005, 13:39
Some more thoughts on our mechanical friends:
Robot - 65pts, s10 powerfist, 1 Heavy Weapon
Automatons - 35pts, s7 powerfist, 1 Assault Weapon

I think that's enough of a seperation, and keeps squads of Automats from running around instakilling Space Marine HQs. They still have a bite when it comes to ranged weapons but it's nowhere near as good as the Robot's. Add +5pts to all the weapon options available to the Robot except the Heavy Flamer [25pts for a Twinlinked Plasma Cannon!], change the Automats so they can have Flamer +8, Meltagun +12, Plasma +15, Grenade +10; and we're golden.

I think the wording is much better and clearer for the units we discussed.


Have you perused the background stuff? I would love your input there as I believe you also have knowledge of the Squats Epic background.
Depends on what you want to know. I don't know much about how the actual units fared in the game as I never encountered Squats in 2nd Edition.

I know the basic history of the Squats and it's not hard to find out more.

Easy E
06-12-2005, 19:36
I might consider calling them scrambler charges, but yeah, the good ones are taken.

Machine Curse looks nice, the dimensions of a Rock Wall should be given (MY Rock Wall is 3 ft. long...), Fortitude should be written 'until the beginning of the next clan turn..', and I wouldn't usually pay that much to take Ward of the Ancients-most the army has a 4+ save that pretty much every Heavy Weapon will negate. Also it needs the duration specified.
Force weapons (P46 of the rulebook) are power weapons-but if the psyker wounds a character, he can pass a leadership test to inflict Instant Death. This counts as a psychic power for the turn.

I thought a slow moving Fast Attack choice was perfect. They always get to deplay and get a free move, but they still don't fly across the table. They should be able to assault if there's a squat close enough to order it (12 inches or so), and they could be given special weapons instead of heavies (they are smaller).

Scrambler Charges sound fine to me. I'll keep brainstorming, but we may have a winner.

Great feedback again regarding the psychic powers! This is excellent. I will make the changes you suggested immediately. Should Ward of the Ancients provide an invulnerable save instead? I was afraid that might be overpowered. How about if it allows you to re-roll cover saves? Combine this with purchasing fortifications and you could really dig these little guys in.

The Force weapon sounds useful, but I'm not sure if the Living Ancestor has the stats to back it up. It would work as an option, perhaps 15 points?

For Automatons, I'm keen on the idea of them always being deployed, it's the free move that doesn't seem to fit. The special weapon instead of heavy is an excellent idea.

Again, thanks for your thoughts and feedback. It has been really helpful in fine tuning this list. If only the Citadel Journal was still around.

Easy E
06-12-2005, 19:41
Some more thoughts on our mechanical friends:
Robot - 65pts, s10 powerfist, 1 Heavy Weapon
Automatons - 35pts, s7 powerfist, 1 Assault Weapon

I think that's enough of a seperation, and keeps squads of Automats from running around instakilling Space Marine HQs. They still have a bite when it comes to ranged weapons but it's nowhere near as good as the Robot's. Add +5pts to all the weapon options available to the Robot except the Heavy Flamer [25pts for a Twinlinked Plasma Cannon!], change the Automats so they can have Flamer +8, Meltagun +12, Plasma +15, Grenade +10; and we're golden.

I think you have hit the nail on the head! Thanks Puffin for the great revisions.


Depends on what you want to know. I don't know much about how the actual units fared in the game as I never encountered Squats in 2nd Edition.

I know the basic history of the Squats and it's not hard to find out more.

Yeah, the link in the first post takes you to some tweaked background to make squats less Biker Dwarfs From Mars, and more of a complex race. The History only has some minor tweaks to explain away the whole eaten by Tyranids thing. The real difference is when I discuss the the culture of the Clans and their interlocking social relationships.

IncubiLord
06-12-2005, 20:05
Should Ward of the Ancients provide an invulnerable save instead? I was afraid that might be overpowered. How about if it allows you to re-roll cover saves? Combine this with purchasing fortifications and you could really dig these little guys in.

The Force weapon sounds useful, but I'm not sure if the Living Ancestor has the stats to back it up. It would work as an option, perhaps 15 points?

For Automatons, I'm keen on the idea of them always being deployed, it's the free move that doesn't seem to fit. The special weapon instead of heavy is an excellent idea.

I'd look at the Eldar powers here. Fortune lets you re-roll Armor and cover, but costs 20 pts. Conceal gives a 5+ cover save and costs the same, but warlock powers are automatic.

He doesn't. but force wepons scare the crap out of my Carnifex and models with Power Fists/equivalents. A Nemisis Force weapon with the +2 Strength would be a lot scarier.

If you think of the free move as them patrolling while the fortifications are built, it fits much better. And call them power weapons, people who read S7 power fist may then want to double the Strength (that's what makes it different from a power weapon).

Additional - the stand-and-shoot army is in real trouble in a 6-turn game where almost any army can be in CC by turn 2 (2 12-inch moves and a 6-inch charge on a 6-foot board = your entire deployment zone).

IncubiLord
06-12-2005, 22:19
I took another look...

Why do Rhinos cost 70 pts @ BS3 when they're 50 @BS4 for space marines?
You might want to give the mobile unit 2 special and no heavy.
Thunderers should probably be limited to 1 choice per other troops choice. They are a support unit and this prevents some serious cheese.
Passing comment - with the gyrocopters as FA and the Trikes as Heavy, there's a possibility of many fast-moving heavy weapons.

Easy E
06-12-2005, 22:48
I'd look at the Eldar powers here. Fortune lets you re-roll Armor and cover, but costs 20 pts. Conceal gives a 5+ cover save and costs the same, but warlock powers are automatic.

Good points. I appreciate that information as I do not have the Eldar dex. I feel that Ward of the Ancients will allow you to re-roll armor and cover saves and will be 20 points. It's not automatic like a warlock, but the advantage when combined with other options in the list will be potent.


He doesn't. but force wepons scare the crap out of my Carnifex and models with Power Fists/equivalents. A Nemisis Force weapon with the +2 Strength would be a lot scarier.

Perhaps I can make two pieces of wargear that are Living Ancestor only. A Blade of the Eldar (+15 pts) which would be a force weapon and date back to when the Eldar and Clans traded. I could also make the Maul of the Sacred Forge (+25) which would count as a double handed force weapon.


If you think of the free move as them patrolling while the fortifications are built, it fits much better. And call them power weapons, people who read S7 power fist may then want to double the Strength (that's what makes it different from a power weapon).

I like the idea of patrolling, I'm just not sure it fits for Automatons. How about I give the Scout ability to the Gyrocopters? This fits their background better.

That or I could create another unit type that could act as scouts.

Spotters- Brotherhood
These are units that range ahead of the main Brotherhood force. They locate the enemy, then skirmish to delay their advance. many times they also co-ordinate with the Clan artillery to call in devastating support barrages.
ws bs s t w i a ld sv pts
4 3 3 3 1 2 1 7 4+ 10

Squad: 5-10
Weapons: lasgun
Options: Upgraded to bolters for +5 pts per model
Frag +1 per model
The Squad Leader may swap to las pistol and CC weapon for free
The squad leader maybe upgraded to a Hearthguard for +5 pts. allowed one choice from Clan Wargear list.
1 clansman may upgrade to a Comm-link at +10 pts.
Special: Scouts special rule
Transport: Maybe mounted on bikes for +10 points per model.


I was thinking of reducing the automatons strength to 3 so the Powerfist would make them str. 6.


Additional - the stand-and-shoot army is in real trouble in a 6-turn game where almost any army can be in CC by turn 2 (2 12-inch moves and a 6-inch charge on a 6-foot board = your entire deployment zone).

I whole heartedly agree. I tried to make this list a bit more resilient than guard or Tau. The individul clansman themselves are decent in CC. If they are backed up by Warriors and Slayers they have a fair counter-charge ability. In addition, the firepower of the troop units will hopefully reduce the number of attackers. Lastly, I have provided some fast attack units and elites that can be used as distractions and speedbumps, to stall an enemy assault. Hopefully, major issues can be recognized and dealt with during playtesting.

IncubiLord
07-12-2005, 00:22
Perhaps I can make two pieces of wargear that are Living Ancestor only. A Blade of the Eldar (+15 pts) which would be a force weapon and date back to when the Eldar and Clans traded. I could also make the Maul of the Sacred Forge (+25) which would count as a double handed force weapon.

I like the idea of patrolling, I'm just not sure it fits for Automatons. How about I give the Scout ability to the Gyrocopters? This fits their background better.

The individul clansman themselves are decent in CC. If they are backed up by Warriors and Slayers they have a fair counter-charge ability.

NOT "blade of the eldar" - they have their own unique psyker weapons (unless that changes in the new one next year).

Gyrocopters as scouts has some potential. It keeps them from hanging out because of bad reserve rolls.

What about allowing robots and autos to charge an ongoing melee? Protect the Creators.

Easy E
07-12-2005, 00:54
I took another look...

Why do Rhinos cost 70 pts @ BS3 when they're 50 @BS4 for space marines?
You might want to give the mobile unit 2 special and no heavy.
Thunderers should probably be limited to 1 choice per other troops choice. They are a support unit and this prevents some serious cheese.
Passing comment - with the gyrocopters as FA and the Trikes as Heavy, there's a possibility of many fast-moving heavy weapons.

Sorry, I missed this one. I must have been typing a reply.

The rhino are costed higher because the Brotherhood army is not designed to be mobile, so they pay a higher price for the mobility they can have. I think I will keep the Mobile unit with the potential to take a heavy similar to an Armored Fist squad. Then they can fire out of the top of the rhino.

Good point on the Thunderers. It is a choice that needs to be carefully regulated to avoid beardiness.

Hmmm. I'm not sure what to say about the passing comment. One restriction on it is the fact that they player must have a Guild HQ. Perhaps I should change the Gyrocopter to mount special weapons?


NOT "blade of the eldar" - they have their own unique psyker weapons (unless that changes in the new one next year).

Gyrocopters as scouts has some potential. It keeps them from hanging out because of bad reserve rolls.

What about allowing robots and autos to charge an ongoing melee? Protect the Creators.

Okay, I guess I wanted the Force weapons to tie into some of the background. Perhaps I will call it the Blade of Wisdom, as it is weilded by a Living Ancestor.

Should we update the Gyrocopters points to reflect the Scouts Universal Rules.

Perhaps i will allow them to move into an ongoing melee, but not be considered charging as they are to slow and mechanical for that.

Again, thanks for the great suggestions.

IncubiLord
07-12-2005, 01:05
The rhino are costed higher because the Brotherhood army is not designed to be mobile, so they pay a higher price for the mobility they can have. I think I will keep the Mobile unit with the potential to take a heavy similar to an Armored Fist squad. Then they can fire out of the top of the rhino.

Hmmm. I'm not sure what to say about the passing comment. One restriction on it is the fact that they player must have a Guild HQ. Perhaps I should change the Gyrocopter to mount special weapons?

Should we update the Gyrocopters points to reflect the Scouts Universal Rules.

Perhaps i will allow them to move into an ongoing melee, but not be considered charging as they are to slow and mechanical for that.

They already have an inferior BS, 20 points more price will get you incessant complaints.
Note: Heavy weapons may not be fired from a moving vehicle, you might allow them to choose a second special instead of the heavy (let the player decide) - this is a current trend.

Gyrocopters already tend to cost more than the landspeeders that they look like, and again have a lower BS - just drop on the scouts rule and see how it tests out.

Even orks in mega-armor and chaos obliterators, who always count as moving in difficult terrain because they are so slow, get the charge bonus. Don't make the machines more complicated than they need to be.

IncubiLord
07-12-2005, 21:28
Some other things...
Does exo-armor grant a 2+ save and a 5+ invulnerable, or just the 5+I that the armory says?
Space Marines have their own Artificer Armor, but since they're the same concept this one may slide.
Griffons no longer appear in the IG codex, you might go with the earthshaker from the basilisk as a H Mortar.
Thudd guns would be more fun if they fired a barrage of 4 small blasts instead of 1 large one.
Razorwire and Tank Traps are on P.193 of the rulebook. Razorwire is normally difficult terrain for infantry and ignored by vehicles.
Minefields are on P.205 of the rulebook, and very close to what you wrote up.

Sorry to double-post, but I needed to write it before it slipped by mind.
Any chance of seeing an updated version?

Easy E
07-12-2005, 22:06
Yes, I am just finishing up the updates. Unfortunately, I will not have it up until tomorrow.

Does anyone know how I can actually get this thing to look like an official codex? Do you use photoshop, page maker, print shop or something else? Is there files i can download on the web for the layout? Once we have it worked out a tweaked, I would like to lay it out in a more official format.

IncubiLord
07-12-2005, 22:18
Yes, I am just finishing up the updates. Unfortunately, I will not have it up until tomorrow.

Does anyone know how I can actually get this thing to look like an official codex?

Cool. Thanks for looking at my thread too.

The .doc I made for my DE update looks alot like Codex pages, I just set up a MS Word document, inserted a 2-row table, and tweaked that until it looked like the statline in the original. You could probably get the same look as any codex you want in Word with minimal tweaking.

It would be a little more work to set it up with pictures and inserted 'scenes,' but I plan to stick with Word. Oh, and I actually have that.

Easy E
08-12-2005, 23:02
I think this is all up to date.

Easy E
08-12-2005, 23:03
and lastly, the wargear list.

IncubiLord
10-12-2005, 05:33
A few things from the 'Dex.
Since some difficult terrain rolls 3D6, the "Short" rule should maybe read that squats discard the highest dice for Difficult Terrain.
Are Special Weapons available to characters? Why aren't they with the other 2-handed in the armory?
Weren't Bore Miners going to use the reserves rule in the rulebook?
Did you decide not to change the unit size for Support weapons to 5-10?
Autos and Bots still can't get into melee, and if your opponent uses a "Weapon Destroyed" result on the Powerfist, the autos are trying to scratch a 'Fex to death instead of having a reasonable chance of wounding it.
Is a possible change to the machines waiting for initial playtesting results?

Easy E
13-12-2005, 00:35
A few things from the 'Dex.
Since some difficult terrain rolls 3D6, the "Short" rule should maybe read that squats discard the highest dice for Difficult Terrain.
Are Special Weapons available to characters? Why aren't they with the other 2-handed in the armory?
Weren't Bore Miners going to use the reserves rule in the rulebook?
Did you decide not to change the unit size for Support weapons to 5-10?
Autos and Bots still can't get into melee, and if your opponent uses a "Weapon Destroyed" result on the Powerfist, the autos are trying to scratch a 'Fex to death instead of having a reasonable chance of wounding it.
Is a possible change to the machines waiting for initial playtesting results?

I will attempt to respond in order.

Good point on the "short" rules.
Yes they are available to characters. I don't know why I put them seperate.
Bore Miners should use the same chart. I have a confession. I don't own the 4th ed. rulebook.
Yes I did want to change the size of support weapon crews, I must have missed it.
Yeah, I still have a lot up in the air regarding Automatons for sure. I think they will require further playtesting.

Thanks for catching my errors.

IncubiLord
13-12-2005, 01:01
Here to help.
I suggest stating that "The bore miner always uses the Reserves and will enter play using the rules for Deep Strike, even in missions where these rules are normally disallowed. See page 84 of the Rulebook for details."

As penance for not having the rulebook you must borrow one from a friend and read the passages on:
Deep Strike and Reserves - P.84 & 85,
Razorwire and Tank Traps - P.193, and
Minefields - P.205. :evilgrin:

Easy E
30-12-2005, 20:52
Can some one take a look at my Slow Special Rule for the Clansman. It is located in the HQ section before the actual list. Is that rule still appropriate for 4th edition. It has come to my attention that it may not be.

Thanks.

IncubiLord
30-12-2005, 21:09
Good point.
Pursing enemies was replaced with the Initiative roll-off.
The rule no longer applies.
You could, however, apply it to "fall back" moves, reducing the normal 2D6 to 1D6.

boogle
01-01-2006, 18:58
i feel all Squats should be T4 minimum

MiG_21
02-01-2006, 04:13
aside from the easy-to-convert idea of putting catachan arms and weapons onto standard fantasy dwarves to make easy squats

the question is:

W H Y

dwarves are sad and pathetic enough in fantasy without being resurrected in 40k as squats.

they were killed for a reason: the head boss of GW hates squats with a passion and threatened to kick anyone who tried to re-release them

boogle
02-01-2006, 08:34
can we have your rstionale on why Dwarfs are seemingly so pathetic even in Fantasy?

Easy E
04-01-2006, 04:49
Thanks for your feedback MiG_21. I will take it under consideration.

@ boogle. Don't you feel that T4 is a little high for essentially a human model. I don't think they are as resillient as a Space marine or an Ork.

IncubiLord
04-01-2006, 05:15
They don't really seem as fragile as a guardsman either. It's your version of Squats, but they're really supposed to be space dwarves and dwarves have a widespread reputation for being tougher than humans.
Remember that Toughness is what it takes to take you out of the fight. A Space Marine or Ork could bounce back a lot easier, but still have the same Toughness in game terms.
Also, the large dog running beside a Space Wolves Hero is as Tough as he is...

boogle
04-01-2006, 07:07
Thanks for your feedback MiG_21. I will take it under consideration.

@ boogle. Don't you feel that T4 is a little high for essentially a human model. I don't think they are as resillient as a Space marine or an Ork.
yeah it do think that they should be T4, their Fantasy Equivilents are, so i would keep that small link between the two

Hellebore
05-01-2006, 06:30
The fantasy equivalent doesn't really work, because characters go up 1 point of T and S, while in 40k they don't.

I think T 3 is fine in 40k, where a space marine and his boss are both T4, while a dwarf and his lord are T4 and T5 respectively.

hellebore

Easy E
06-01-2006, 02:02
If I make a stats change of that magnitude, what kind of points increase am I talking? Do you think that the basic Clansman is overpointed as is?

Edit: I did some research on the 1st edition Squats and they all had a T4. So, I guess you guys are right. Plus, it will help differentiate them from IG.

Quin 242
07-02-2006, 21:40
For a good points breakdown you can use Feral Orks and compare straight across.

They translate Exceptionally well. If fact I use Snake Bite orks rules for my Squats in tournements.

My BIGGEST suggestion for your codex is to NOT use the name "The Clan" ever heard of the KKK? It gives a bad connotation to klan/clan :(

Easy E
15-08-2006, 00:18
Arise ye olde thread... Arise!

I managed to do some quick playtesting this weekend on the Clansman Codex. It was the Clansmen versus Orks. The battle was at 1,000 pts.

Clansmen:
HQ-
1 Warlord- Power Weapon, Mater-Crafted Combi-Melta, Runestone
Troops-
Thunderer Squad- 10 clansmen- 3 Auto-cannons, 2 heavy Bolters
Warrior Squad- 1 Hearthguard (w/Power Glove) and 9 warriors.
Clansmen- 1 Hearthguard (w/Power Glove) and 14 Clansmen- Plasma and Missile Launcher.
Fast Attack-
Mobile Squad- Hearthguard (w/Power Glove) and 9 Clansmen- Plasma- Rhino
Heavy Support
Barrage
Support Weapon- Mole Mortar

After assembling this list and starting the battle I realized that I was not using the most up-to-date version of the Codex: Clansmen- OH NO!

Orks:
HQ
Warboss- Waaagh Banner, Cybork Body, Big Horns, Choppa, Slugga, Tankbustas, Frag
Troops-
Shoota Boyz- 1 Nob (w/Big Shoota) and 15 Boyz- 3 Rokits
Slugga Boyz- 1 Nob (W/Big Shoota) and 15 Boyz- 2 Big Shootas
Fast Attack-
Trukk Boyz- 1 Nob (Power Klaw) and 8 Boyz w/slugga/choppa- 1 Burna- Trukk w/Rokit and Riggers
Trukk Boyz- 1 Nob (Big Shoota0 and 9 Boyz w/Shootas- 1 Rokit Launcha- Trukk w/Rokit and Riggers
7 Warbikes- Twin Linked Big Shootas

The game was Recon and Escalation was not used.

Results- Ork Victory

Notes:
1. Recon is not the optimum scenario for this army. The mobile unit was too little and too slow for the mission. Exactly as the Codex was designed.
2. The armor save of 4+ made the clansmen very resilient to Ork shooting. If they would have been T4 it would have been unbalancing. The large Clansmen unit was difficult to eliminate.
3. They held their own in CC with the Orks. They weren't winning, but they held the Orks up.
4. The Barrage and Mole Mortar were not entirely effective. The Barage made it's points back, but the Mole Mortar did not.
5. The Thunderer's were not as dominant as I feared. They were points effective.
6. The firepower of the army was not enough to hold off the Orks. However, it did keep that out of wholesale close combat for 4 turns. Kill for Kill the armies were relatively balanced, but the Orks easily secured the Recon Mission objective with their speed.
7. Master-Crafting the Warlord's Combi-weapon was a stupid idea. In the shooting phase, he chooses to fire his weapon or call in the barrage. He was to busy calling in barrages to fire his master-crafted weapon.

Easy E
19-08-2006, 00:17
I was thinking more about the T4 issue and did some number crunching in a world of pure theory and numbers. Note: All fractions were rounded up.

Shooting
Clansmen T3 pts 10 4+ Sv
12 Clansmen versus 20 Guard Infantry
Kill ratio is 1/1
2 Clansmen to 2 Guardsmen per turn

Clansmen T4 pts 10 4+ sav
12 Clansmen versus 20 Guard Infantry
Kill Ratio of 1/2
1 Clansmen to 2 Guardsmen per turn

Clansmen T4 pts 12 4+ sv
10 Clansmen versus 20 Guard Infantry
Results as above.

H2H
Clansmen T3 pts 10 4+ sv
12 Clansmen versus 20 Guard
IG Go first
Kill Ratio 3/2
3 Dead Clansmen to 2 dead Guard

Clansmen T4 pts 10 4+ sv
12 Clansmen versus 20 Guard
IG Go first
Kill ratio 1/1
2 Dead Clansmen to 2 dead Guard

Clansmen T4 pts 12 4+ sv
10 Clansmen versus 20 Guard
IG Go first
As above

Conclusion: Well what does all this mean? The goal is to find an equivalent where a certain number of points in Clansmen will equal the same number of points of Guard for effectiveness. If this is the criteria, then:

T3 pts 10 and sv 4+ Clansmen are less effective than standard Guard

T4 pts 10 4+ sv Clansmen are slightly more effective than standard Guard

T4 pts 12 4+ sv Clansmen seem to be equivalent.

Therefore, the stats on the basic Clansmen should be adjusted to T4 pts 12 4+sv.

Thoughts on this? Anyone?

Puffin Magician
16-09-2006, 00:56
Hmm. I ignore the thread for a few weeks and suddenly we're all T4, based on the arguments that "they used to be" and "they are in WHFB". Pah, I say!

The only unequivalent thing about T3 10pt 4+Sv Squats vs IG in your example is that they got beaten unevenly in an Assault, where the IG go first and nearly outnumber the Squats 2:1. Isn't it expected that the Guardsmen would win?

I think T3 and 4+Sv for 10pts is fine; and there's more to differentiating an army than simply giving it a better basic statline [Eldar are certainly different than IG, no?].

About your playtest, well you probably should've played a Cleanse or some equally-boring mission to get used to the units and playing style. A slow, low-mobility army vs. a speedy stabby army running around looking for objectives?

As for Feral Orks... well Squats have technology, shouldn't be T4, and are able to hit things when they shoot at them. 6+Sv is pathetic, too.

Easy E if you want I could attempt to slap together a Codex in .pdf format, I've got absolutely nothing to do here at college and I wouldn't mind making the list all tidy and adding pictures.

Easy E
16-09-2006, 03:44
Regarding the T4 issue, I'm glad to hear arguments about the other side of things as well. I have to admit, I'm torn like an old sweater.

On one hand, with an Sv of 4+ they are resillient to small arms fire all ready. T4 may make them unbalanced. plus, they are simply small, round humans, I'm not sure what background justifies a T4 status or if it was a hold-over from Fantasy.

However, on the other side of the fence, T4 at 12 pts would make both a smaller (more fluffy) army but also more resillient. This also seems to be a potential niche in 40K that has not been exploited yet.

As to the Play-test, yeah I should have stuck with cleanse. However, I have a real hard time playing a cleanse mission and feeling any satisfaction afterwards. I guess for the good of the list I should bite the bullet, but Army design should be fun!

As to the Codex .pdf, what do you need from me. I think a real codex would be sweet! I'm surprised you'd have the time. Shouldn't you be building a titan, or some Ordinatus or expanding your Armored Battlegroup or something?

Puffin Magician
16-09-2006, 03:56
As you will see in my signature, I have quit the ways of paying way too much for paint, models and rules.

I'm currently commissioning a Stormhammer as well as a Reaver Titan for Pyramid_Head, but I don't want that to be the only thing between sleep and class.

I'll need all your up-to-date rules and fluff, as well as any suggestions for pictures you want in the Codex. I'll scavenge the web like a **** for them, but if you have any specific ones you can provide that'd be primo.

Easy E
16-09-2006, 04:25
Awesome, I will start gathering it up. I will also try to edit it for grammar and spelling, but I can't say it will be perfect. This will take me over the weekend.

For rules and fluff I am assuming you want them in .txt format so you can open them on your computer. I believe you mentioned something about that earlier.

Easy E
19-09-2006, 00:05
Here are the most recent text documents for the Army List. I am doing some additional work on the Background pieces. I am also going to re-do the "Why Collect a Clan Army" section so that part can be eliminated.

(I'm 90% sure this is the most up to date version)

Easy E
19-09-2006, 00:44
I'm very concerned about creating an over-powered dex. As a result, I am asking all you gamers out there to try and make the cheesiest stathammer list you can and post it here. I would like to see 1000 pt, 1500 pt, and 1850 pt, and 2000 pt lists posted here along with how you think the list will perform.

Here is an example:

The list below is a 1,000 pt list. The walls will be deployed and the Thunderers, Howitzer Support Weapon team, and 1 Plasma heavy Clansmen squad will be placed behind them to clog up a fire lane. The Mole Mortar support squad will go behind cover out of LOS. The two remaining troops squads can go anywhere, with the Warden taking a position near the Howitzers for additional morale and cc ability. The idea is a simple SAFH list.

Puffin Magician
19-09-2006, 03:38
There are a few things I've noticed in the text need to be ironed out or simply reworded.

Example is the Automotons. It says they "may" be armed with Assault Weapons, not they have to be. I think allowing them to run around being Av11 powerfists at only 35pts is unfair, so forcing them to pay for manditory Assault Weapons is something I would do.

Do you want me to get back to you on everything I find, or do I simply reword it and interpret rules at my leisure? Of course if something changes drastically I'll ask first, but most errors [and there's not many] are simple mistakes that I can fix without constantly badgering you.

I'll get back to you with a Cheesy List after I've done some more work on the Codex, tonight was mainly re-formatting the text to throw it into my Atlantis Word Processor.

Easy E
19-09-2006, 19:31
Yeah, things like that you can just change. I think the Gyrocopters have the word "may" in there as well, but it should read "must" be armed with.

I encourage you to use your own initiative. I think we have a good understanding of what we want.

Edit: I know the wargear description list needs to be alphabetized as well.