PDA

View Full Version : lords



The Blades of reason
30-07-2009, 20:19
i was wondering wether people prefer a mage or a fighting character as their lord in 2000pt games.

if ok could you say what army you use and what style do you play, e.g. cav, heavy inf, mage heavy etc.

TheSanityAssassin
30-07-2009, 20:37
Lv 4 Archmage. I play High Elves, and it's generally an Infantry heavy force focusing on support casting and magic defence, and strong hero performance.

kaubin
30-07-2009, 21:05
I like the magic character, I feel you get fighty enough stuff with heroes, but the low level mages just don't cut it for me.

BlueMoonGoblins
30-07-2009, 21:21
Well i usually rely on magic when i play, i set my night goblin troops to fight everything that comes near me while i stand with my shamans and my level 4 great shaman and cast spells

Drachen_Jager
30-07-2009, 21:29
On the whole I think the game would play better without Lords. Some armies have Lords that are quite balanced but there are some that have game-play that revolves around the lord, or at least the Lord is such an asset that the win/loss ratio becomes entirely different for sub 2000 games and over 2000 games (I don't think I need to name army books here). I think the game should be more about the troops, not "herohammer" for the lucky few who have Über-lords and nothing for the rest.

puppetmaster24
30-07-2009, 21:32
Fighty character of DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!!

PeG
30-07-2009, 21:36
I usually think that fighty characters are more fun but the lvl 4 mage much more competitive. Of course there are exceptions (such as the thirster) but for most armies I dont think that this is the case.

willowdark
30-07-2009, 23:31
I thought I would've voted for the caster lord, since I'm running one with my DEs, but it occurred to me that if the army had knights that weren't a liability, from being Stupid, I'd much rather prefer a Lord with Knight accompaniment w 3 Lvl2's support.

In my WE I run the Wardancer Highborn and get much more satisfaction out of his star performances than the Supreme Sorceress'.

decker_cky
30-07-2009, 23:38
Doombull! I suppose he should technically be classified as fighty character of doom, but I can't vote that since he's not. He's Ld9, some fear resistance and the ability to take core minotaurs.

Unuhexium
30-07-2009, 23:56
I usually take a Lv 4 Sorcerer lord of Tzeentch. Reason: there's generally no really good reason to take a chaos lord (fighty dude). There are some special jobs he's good at, but not a lot.

TheDean04
31-07-2009, 02:26
Where was the Lv.4 wizard option?

Ozorik
31-07-2009, 02:42
I have never run a wizard lord (not since 4th ed at least, and that was a necromancer); I just dont like magic.

I always take a lord, usually with far too many points of magic items :) my Dwarf lord is actually maxed out.

StrangeGuy
31-07-2009, 02:57
My Wood Elves are completely Lord free, but i'm not of the mindset of many people i've met have that Lords = Bad. In fact I think lords add a really nice touch to most armies in a friendly environment, and in tournements and the like you expect to come up against them. It just fits my style more to have a couple of Heroes and some units than a charcter orientated list. I do however want to try out a Wardancer Highborn at some point. Those things just seem cool!

Dai-Mongar
31-07-2009, 03:47
Fighty lords often have the best Ld, which can be a factor, but I'm going to go ahead and start using a L4 sorceress in my DE army for a change of pace.

PARTYCHICORITA
31-07-2009, 03:50
i usually go for combat lords.
I find the Ld boost useful and enjoy the Active CR.

Draconian77
31-07-2009, 03:55
I've never been a massive fan of magic, so when the Druchii finally got their update and the ability to take decent magic defense without 6+ levels of magic, lets just say that I was a very happy gamer.

Generally speaking I'm not against Lord choices, but like all things in WHFB these days, there are the bad ones, the good ones and the ones that make you go; "Only how many points?"

TheSanityAssassin
31-07-2009, 04:10
Definately agree with Draconian....I really wish my High Elves could run without magic, I'd much rather not take it....but if I don't I just get blown to bits in return, and if I'm going to spend 500 pts on Casting defense, it might as well be able to blow stuff up in return.

Eternus
31-07-2009, 09:56
I do much prefere a fighty Lord with my WoC's, Dwarves & Bretonnians, but lucky me, with my Vamps, I get to have a level 3 magic user that can also be a Fighty Character of Doom!

Bassik
31-07-2009, 11:29
I must use a Slann. That big guy is the main reason I started playing lizardmen in the first place.
If you just look into the eyes of those lost children of fallen gods, you see a glimpse of the Great Old Ones, and all you can hope is to forget about that glimpse for the rest of your short, meaningless life.

Staurikosaurus
31-07-2009, 11:38
I usually use the Slann, but on occasion the Oldblood comes out to play. If I am feeling cheeky then I take triple scar vet.

Keller
31-07-2009, 14:53
My main concern is making my general work with the army, and that is usually a fighty character for their Ld boost.

Empire:
My normal selection is the never-seen General of the Empire. He provides Ld9, allows a magic standard on an infantry unit, and is cheap to boot. My army is an infantry line supported by some warmachines, ranged-units, and the occasional fast or heavy cav.

Ogre Kingdoms:
Tyrant is my only option at 2k. Usually set up to carve up units rather than fight challenges, but he can hold his own against most anything. Army is comprised of several units of bulls and guts, backed by belchers, trappers, and either giants or maneaters.

VC:
Usually go for a lvl 3 fighter. Usually make him fairly good at magic and fighting, without going all out on either. Army is infantry-based with knights being very uncommon.

Dogs of War:
As with Empire, I go for leadership of the General. The army could have anything, depending on what I feel like, but is most often pikemen and duelists, both of which need the LD boost.

Dwarves:
Haven't gotten to 2K yet, but am anticipating a Lord rather than Runesmith w/ anvil.

Blaklabel
01-08-2009, 07:40
Grey seers all the way, I like my Plague spell a lot. I also like my 3 Warlock Engineers.

Dragune
01-08-2009, 07:45
I go with the Slann. Skink Priests are pretty good for magic defense but lore of heavens gets kind of old even though its been good for me and more magic defense (play against a lot of magic heavy armies right now) I want to try out an Oldblood on a Carnosaur sometime but it might be a while before I do that.

Condottiere
01-08-2009, 07:58
It's an awful choice, but it really depends on the strategy that you plan on pulling off.

Dungeon_Lawyer
02-08-2009, 08:45
Home games and big Tournies out comes the slann---Away games and friendly matches out comes scar-vets or old-blood.

Desert Rain
02-08-2009, 08:55
With my High Elves I always use a L.4 Archmage. My lizardmen are led by an oldblood, but that's mostly because I don't have a Slann model.

isidril93
02-08-2009, 08:55
fighty character of doom

high elf prince with white sword

Mullitron
02-08-2009, 09:20
I like the Demon prince, (WOC) it can assist in fights with its 5 strength 5 attacks and has access to 7 lores of magic whilst flying around and causing terror : ) not to mention the belakor and the soon to be released (hopefully) plastic prince models look great.

Von Wibble
02-08-2009, 12:37
No option for both? Vampires, Daemons, Chaos, Beasts and to a lesser extent empire and high elves all have this option...

My high elves - I take a prince with radiant gem. I go for heavens for the first spell which is useful pretty much all the time (reroll shooting early, charges later). Throw in 2 L2s and a commander and banner of sorcery and you've got an army whose characters are strong in magic (9-11PD and 5 DD) without sacrificing combat.

Wood elves - tougher choice. Magic is one of the main weapons vs WE even with MR, since magic missiles don't roll to hit, and that hit modifier is a crucial element of defense. Against any army capable of magical barrage (and therefore alsom in tournament scenario) I therefore opt for a spellweaver with wand of ariel for those crucial rerolls. Against a lighter magic foe I take a lord - usualy with bow of loren, gw, and possibly arcane bodkins (certainly vs Brets)

Tomb Kings - TK and 3 liche priests or High priest, Priest, 2 x prince (sometimes even an IB and 1 prince!)

Empire - WAlter, priest, wizard, captain, or general, 2 x wizard, priest if I want to save points.

Dark elves - High Sorceress, Hag, Sorceress. No 4th character -save points for assassins. Alternative, Lord, 2 x sorceress, Hag. I fnid 2 wizards are plenty to inflict a nasty magic phase on the opponent and really like the cauldron so the hag is in.

The Blades of reason
02-08-2009, 21:50
i forgot about a others i only thought about vampires going fighty and magic

no thoughts on use of special characters

Shagrat
02-08-2009, 22:21
Keeper of Secrets FTW!!!!

wingedserpant
03-08-2009, 12:27
I never take special characters.

I always take a fighty Lord for Orcs and Goblins. A Lv4 for my chaos and my vampire are yet to reach that points value.

Gaargod
03-08-2009, 12:55
Doombull! I suppose he should technically be classified as fighty character of doom, but I can't vote that since he's not. He's Ld9, some fear resistance and the ability to take core minotaurs.

Don't diss the Doombull man - mark of Khorne, with heavy armour (and shield for protection) and Axes of Khorgor. 8 S5 WS6 rerolling attacks a turn is nothing to sniffle at.

Anyways:

LM - currently Oldblood on carni, sometimes use Slann

Orcs - fighty Black orc (sometimes on wyvern)

Ogres - Tyrant (or Skragg, who is both a fighty character, magic caster and a special character!)

shartmatau
03-08-2009, 13:32
im just getting back into fantasy after a couple of years not playing. I hear lots of people say they don't like herohammer, which I find odd. I love making heros and heroic combats are what a fantasy based wargame are all about to me. I find it very hard to not have full number of characters when making an army, after making it those characters will switch and be changed.

For my old dwarves I always used a Dwarf Lord. They are just too awesome to pass up.
Im making some High Elves now and I think I will need the lvl4 to have some defense and light offense magic. using a lvl4 and 3 nobles.

Tweakout
03-08-2009, 14:10
I personally always prefer my non magic lord choice no matter what army I'm playing, I've dabbled in most but focus on Ogres and Wood Elves. That being said there was a time in my group when the lowest amount of power die I could expect to face was six and that was if my opponent really didn't like to use magic that game. It was all magic all the time, which forces you to go magic defense and that usually means a level four mage to counter. Even in friendly games it is not fun to always have your two-four dispel die compared to the 13 power die or so my opponent fields.

Fjoergyn
03-08-2009, 14:17
With my rats, if the game is versus dwarfs, "fighty" lord, else, greyseer. I use the black ork with da boyz, and only heroes with demons (damn, they are a little expensive...)

hippodude21
03-08-2009, 14:18
chaos lord now thats a fighty character of doom :)

Crube
03-08-2009, 15:02
I prefer the Mage option, for the sheer reason that whenever I've tried a fightly lord (of Doom) s/he is a lot easier to avoid. With a spell caster, I've found them to be more effective and reliable in what they do.

Plus, I love the magic side of the game too, which probably sways my judgement somewhat.

REcently however, I have been running a Treeman Ancient in my Wood Elf list to reasonable effect - a fighty lord with a little magic on the side...

pcgamer72
03-08-2009, 16:15
[COLOR="Pink"]I've never been a massive fan of magic, so when the Druchii finally got their update and the ability to take decent magic defense without 6+ levels of magic, lets just say that I was a very happy gamer.


The Ring of Hotek is definitely better than "decent." :)

Poseidal
06-08-2009, 09:02
Fighty character of DOOOOOOM!!

I don't know why, I just prefer them.

In Wood Elves, it's either a Wardancer Highborne with the Blades of Loec and a spite and pendant to help OR I take the Tree Man ancient, as a Monster Lord.

Even in Empire, my favourite is the Templar Grand Master, either equipped for defense (Holy Relic + Re-rollable plate armour) or offense (Laurels of Victoly + Magic Weapon with possibly one of the cheaper war saves if I have the points).

Havock
06-08-2009, 23:12
In the previous WoC book:

Fighty level 4 mage of doom :p

Now: multitasking level 4 mage on dragon. Hands down my favourite tool.

rtunian
07-08-2009, 15:00
my latest love is the savage warboss on chariot with ironclaw's cleava.
5 ws6 hit=wound, no as attacks, plus impact hits, plus 4 ws3 s5 (s3 if not on the charge), plus 2 ws3 s4 (s3 after round 1)

i don't know why more o&g generals don't take either of the 100 point weaps... they are both sexlicious+1. maybe it's there's some stigma on spending the full 100 points for one item? or is it just "i want to protect my general!!" syndrome?

don't get me wrong, protecting gen is important, but imo greenskins should be more reckless :)

Tarian
07-08-2009, 15:09
If by doom, you mean "very hard to kill for a T3 Character", I field a fighty lord.

I play a CC oriented HE army and I like to throw him under the bus for large characters with the odd chance that he might survive.

Draconian77
07-08-2009, 16:45
The Ring of Hotek is definitely better than "decent." :)

Doesn't work against half the armies in the game...
I wasn't just mentioning the Ring, the Null Talismans are useful too.

Without both of these we would be like High Elves(pretty much forced to go magic heavy)

Lordsaradain
07-08-2009, 16:59
I prefer games <2k so no lords for me. :P