PDA

View Full Version : Your Eldar Avatar Proposal



grizzly ruin
25-05-2005, 16:34
After a continuing discussion on the "Eldar Trauma" thread about the possible future of the avatar, I've decided to put it into it's own thread and see what the greater general consensus is.

So, basically there are two parts to this.

If the Avatar was to be increased to the level of power equal of a Greater Daemon,

What special abilities and stats should he have?

What points cost and associated drawbacks should he recieve?


The Greater Daemons of chaos have the drawbacks of;


High points costs
Must be summoned into play (which admittedly is more often a blessing)
Must sacrifice an Aspiring Champion as a casualty to bring GD into play
If the AC is killed before the GD is summoned, the GD still arrives but must take an instability test at the end of each turn (3d6 vs. LD 10, If over 10 subtract the difference from the GDs wounds).



I, along with anyone else who feels like chiming in, will play devil's advocate.

hairyman
25-05-2005, 16:44
Ok....

Should get Daemonic Speed to represent its size, its big loping legs and the fact that I imagine it can eat up the ground when it gets a charge up. Maybe deny it fleet, though... just the 12" charge bit.

Armour save should be at least 4+ inv, if not 3+ (Asurmen gets this so why not the Avatar?).. other stats I'd pretty much leave alone.

Wailing Doom should do something groovy but not overpowering.. maybe a minus to enemy leadership as per Daemonic visage?

Argument for giving it a farseer power...? eldritch storm or mindwar?

Immunity to flame based attacks

Should have a table similar to the chaos dreadnaught.. maybe a roll of a 1 on a d6 and it charges towards the nearest unit (friend or foe) and assaults? Or it's simply subject to blood frenzy as per Khornite berserkers? Has a similar effect on nearby eldar units? Dunno... trying to think of some drawbacks... these seem a bit wonky, I guess.

Points cost should include extra abilities and the cost of the exarch sacrificed to awaken it?

self biased
25-05-2005, 17:22
first off: define flame based attacks. attacks by flamers and heavy flamers? attacks that are hot, like melta weapons and plasma weapons. attacks that generate heat when the strike their target, such as lasweapons, missiles, and bolters (which are essentially rocket propelled grenades)? and what about the incinerator? it's a heavy flamer that burns a special brand of blessed prometheum specifically targeting daemons. and guess what: all the daemonhunter special tricks work on the avatar.

Anvils Hammer
25-05-2005, 17:34
i think that while it should recieve apower boost, making it as good as a greater deamon would make it a stupidly high number of points.

it should remain just as easy to kill, but become faster moving and signifacantly more powerfull in close combat. somthing like the ability to re roll all missed attacks.

lord_blackfang
25-05-2005, 17:37
3+ armour and 4+ invulnerable would be a good start.
Fleet of foot.
Forget fire immunity, it's a bother to keep track off and not forward-compatible.

I have no idea for the Wailing Doom. Maybe make it a big harpoon and rename it the Whaling Doom? :D

Solarc
25-05-2005, 17:46
Well... GW is going to do what GW is going to do... but since we are playing let's pretend... I'll bite.


Ok....

Should get Daemonic Speed to represent its size, its big loping legs and the fact that I imagine it can eat up the ground when it gets a charge up. Maybe deny it fleet, though... just the 12" charge bit.


12" charge is a good idea. make him a bit unique.



Armour save should be at least 4+ inv, if not 3+ (Asurmen gets this so why not the Avatar?).. other stats I'd pretty much leave alone.


4+ Inv would be ok... How about making it unique? Always gets 4+ save... Represents his "this is a bit of a god"... like an inverse C'tan weapon... so to speak. Such a save would have to come with an increase in cost that's appropriate... Just an idea to throw out there.



Wailing Doom should do something groovy but not overpowering.. maybe a minus to enemy leadership as per Daemonic visage?

How about something like "Enemies (non Eldar) roll extra d6 when making morale/pinning/leadership checks of any kind with in 12" of the Avatar.. take highest". Pick your level of effectiveness. Psychological doom. Fearless units are immune.



Argument for giving it a farseer power...? eldritch storm or mindwar?


No. Leave the Farseer powers out of this...



Immunity to flame based attacks


Hard to define, as self-biased pointed out. You'd have to make a list... which is clumsy.

Might think about an idea along the lines of "Max str 8" like the waveserpent energy field, since most of those "heat weapons" are high str.

self biased
25-05-2005, 17:46
someone suggested having to sacrifice an exarch to summon the avatar. rather fluffy, i might say. perhaps the wailing doom could take a few different forms depending on what was sacrificed.

Kahadras
25-05-2005, 18:28
Maybe certain things could change about the avatar depending on what type of Exarch was sacrificed. A Striking scorpion would make the Avatar tougher (increase toughness), A Howling banshee would make it quicker (inceased initative or always goes first in hth). A Swooping Hawk would make it faster. A Dark Reaper would make Wailing Doom more powerful. I dunno but it certainly would be cool.

Kahadras

Solarc
25-05-2005, 18:39
Maybe certain things could change about the avatar depending on what type of Exarch was sacrificed. A Striking scorpion would make the Avatar tougher (increase toughness), A Howling banshee would make it quicker (inceased initative or always goes first in hth). A Swooping Hawk would make it faster. A Dark Reaper would make Wailing Doom more powerful. I dunno but it certainly would be cool.

Kahadras

And if you sacrificed a Dire Avenger Exarch.... he becomes a Giant Glorified Guardian. :) Just Kidding.

Actually, It's a cool idea. Would make for some interesting modeling opportunities too. GW would design the base model, and Forge World could make some specific "Aspects" (pun intended) of the Avatar.

Everybody wins!

Now you just have to balance the powers.

Sgt John Keel
25-05-2005, 18:41
IIRC, the Avatar is some kind of psyker too. I'm going of Shadow Point here, but there he's running lines of fire along the ground and firing flames from the Wailing Doom.

Anyway, Fearsome Visage or the Horror might be appropriate. Maybe the Wailing Doom could function like a Dark Blade?

/Adrian

Kahadras
25-05-2005, 18:50
And if you sacrificed a Dire Avenger Exarch.... he becomes a Giant Glorified Guardian

Nah he would just be a standard Avatar with no particular upgrades.

Kahadras

Scythe
25-05-2005, 18:55
12" charge is a good idea. make him a bit unique..

Hmm, not sure if this is really justified. Most creatures assaulting 12" have a good reason to (move with 4 legs, leaping legs etc, the Avatar doesn't exactly have any of these).


4+ Inv would be ok... How about making it unique? Always gets 4+ save... Represents his "this is a bit of a god"... like an inverse C'tan weapon... so to speak. Such a save would have to come with an increase in cost that's appropriate... Just an idea to throw out there..

No thanks. Invulnerable saves who aren't that invulnerable after all are a pain enough, no need to overcomplicate this further with the super or mega invulnerable save, which obviously will bring another weapon catogery which will ignore super/mega invulnerable saves, count as a heavy close combat weapon versus armour saves, but leaves normal invulnerable saves alone.

See what I mean? ;)


How about something like "Enemies (non Eldar) roll extra d6 when making morale/pinning/leadership checks of any kind with in 12" of the Avatar.. take highest". Pick your level of effectiveness. Psychological doom. Fearless units are immune.

Fluffy, but rather powerfull. Maybe something more in the line of the tyranid psychic scream? (eg just a negative Ld modifier?)


Might think about an idea along the lines of "Max str 8" like the waveserpent energy field, since most of those "heat weapons" are high str.

Which would have limited use tough, since Avatars are T6....:D

Seriously, an upgraded 4+ (or even 3+) invulnerable save represents unnatural resilience against heat based attacks pretty good in my opinion.


Maybe certain things could change about the avatar depending on what type of Exarch was sacrificed. A Striking scorpion would make the Avatar tougher (increase toughness), A Howling banshee would make it quicker (inceased initative or always goes first in hth). A Swooping Hawk would make it faster. A Dark Reaper would make Wailing Doom more powerful. I dunno but it certainly would be cool.

Cool idea acctually. Doubtfull if it would happen, but nice nontheless. Also, sacrificing an exarch would bring the Avatar more into line with the Chaos greater daemons, which is a good thing in my opinion (hence give it a 4+ invulnerable and basic daemon instability). I'd imagine an Avatar having about equal (or slightly less) power as a Keeper of Secrets.

Cloudscape_online
25-05-2005, 18:56
Make him immune to plasma, flamer and melta weapons. He was like that in 2nd ed, it wasn't much because lascannons, autocannons, missile launchers, Assault cannons, mutilasers and so on were still capable of giving him hell. A 4+ invulnerable save would be good too, no more though.

:D Make the wailing doom have the shooting profile of... wait for it... a Starcannon! :cheese: I'm gonna get a slap for that one, lol.

Solarc
25-05-2005, 18:56
Yep! Standard Avatar.

I wonder if GW would go for this Avatar Aspect idea and translate it into models. The Standard Avatar would be made to look Dire Avenger-ish... then you get variants, possibly from Forge World. Right up a female torso for the Banshee Aspect!

Could be very cool!

Solarc
25-05-2005, 19:08
[snip]
Solarc said: "How about something like "Enemies (non Eldar) roll extra d6 when making morale/pinning/leadership checks of any kind with in 12" of the Avatar.. take highest". Pick your level of effectiveness. Psychological doom. Fearless units are immune."

Fluffy, but rather powerfull. Maybe something more in the line of the tyranid psychic scream? (eg just a negative Ld modifier?)


No... too mundane. TheWailing Doom should be powerful. It's the signature feature and descriptor for the Avatar since it's inception. It should not just copy a negative leadership mod. Avatar should have one nasty 'aspect' in it's profile... I think it should be the Wailing Doom. Making it a psychological aspect gives with a kick and something that Eldar really don't have in their arsenal... psychological edge. make this thing terrifying to those who are subject to such things.



[snip]
I'd imagine an Avatar having about equal (or slightly less) power as a Keeper of Secrets.

Agreed. and I agree with the comments I snipped.

Cloudscape_online
25-05-2005, 19:08
Avatar of Khaine

Avatar of Avenger

Avatar of Banshee

Avatar of Reaper

Avatar of Scorpion

Avatar of Hawk

Avatar of Spider

Avatar of Dragon

The standard avatar should have the most raw power, and the specialised avatars could have lower stats but more ability?

Oh look, we've got phoenix lords. pants :eyebrows: Maybe that's not such a good idea. But definately different variations on the model stylisation. Maybe avatars that act as patrons to a particular aspect and gain a minor advantage for doing so?

Flame Boy
25-05-2005, 19:24
I seriously like the idea of the Avatar reflecting the aspect of the exarch sacrificed, and it could give him supernatural abilities based on the aspect. the advantage is that you don't have to give the Avatar all the abilities suggested, as they can be spread between each aspect.

For example, Shining spear aspect... the Wailing Doom changes form into a spear and thrown a certain distance, causing one single hit on an enemy. (6-12 inches maybe?)
Maybe the Banshee aspect would amplify the effect of the Wailing Doom's phychological effects, or it could reflect increased agility perhaps?
I would imagine the Warp Spiders and Fire Dragons might be kinda tricky. The Warp Spiders are the aspect of pre-emptive defence through ambush, right? They have tough armour and they teleport, but I don't see what you could give the Avatar as an ability that encapsulates that philosophy. Fire Dragons are sturdy, have a affinity with heat weapons and attack at short range, which is basically the Avatar anyway.





I think one ability seperate from sacrificial abilites would be that the Avatar should get an "acid blood" kinda rule. If you wound a creature in close combat with molten iron for blood, you're going to get burned. Horribly.

Barbarossa
25-05-2005, 19:38
Wailing Doom: Maybe have the wounds caused by the Avatar count twice against combat resolution?

Apart from that, we know that the Eldar have to 'summon' the Avatar aboard their craftworld - this rules out "possession" on the battlefield. This would mean that
a) players have to buy their choice of Avatar from the beginning or
b) you roll for a random aspect at the beginning of the game.

Kzer-Za
25-05-2005, 20:50
The changes to the Avatar should IMO rectify the current problems with the Avatar... Naturally this will boost the price a bit but I have no problems with that... I want a godly figure which actually seem worth it when going to war in comparison to the Exarch sacrificed...

a) The Avatar should get a 4+ invulnerable and 3+ normal save in my opinion...
It isn't alive, is daemonically possessed and has magma for blood, so come on!!

b) The Wailing doom should have an effect! Personally I would like this to be the Sustained Assault Power like the Swooping hawk exarch may have, but instead of darting to and fro this represents the avatar cleaving through several enemies in close combat with its THEN mighty close combat weapon. I'm sick and tired of having grots and stuff swamping it and tying it down for the whole game because it has so few attacks...

c) It should be a special character. I mean, and I play Eldar myself, that since it is just one per craftworld it shouldn't be encountered except in the direst circumstances which are covered with this rule.

d) who cares about any favoured: all non-eldar rules really? It is WS10 for Khaines sake, and will hit on 3+ on anyone except others which are WS10 and they will be gods like it!

There are probably other things I could have mentioned also, but these are the most pressing matters IMO

Kzer-Za

athamas
25-05-2005, 21:00
remember the avatar is awoken before the battle in the heart of the craftworld, and thus you should have to take an aspect unit without an exarch to field him [no time to find a replacement]


and he only becomes unstable once the eldar around him lose thier lust for battle, ie he wont become unstable on a battlefield,


thus he should be comparable to a greater deamon, though slightly weaker, but with no instability!

Sgt John Keel
25-05-2005, 21:08
remember the avatar is awoken before the battle in the heart of the craftworld, and thus you should have to take an aspect unit without an exarch to field him [no time to find a replacement]


Exarches aren't common anyway, so there's no excuse to field one with every unit in any case. And the Avatar can awake without the sacrifice of the Young King, as noted in Shadow Point.

/Adrian

athamas
25-05-2005, 21:18
true, but it is usuall...

hence all the runes around his neck

Antaeus
25-05-2005, 21:22
Hmm...ideas for the Avatar:

WS10 BS0 S8 T6 W4 I4 A3 Ld10 Sv4+ inv

The Wailing Doom: Either does D3 wounds per wound, or allows Avatar to make 1 S5 attack against all enemies in base contact.

Daemonic

Inspiring Presence

------------------------
I dislike the idea of a 3+ save for the same reason I dislike the Bloodthrister and Bloodletters having one..it gives them a save against Psycannons, which are meant to be deadly against Daemons...

Sgt John Keel
25-05-2005, 21:44
I spent some time making rules up too. Note that the points cost is absent, as I don't know what to assign to it, and that is a subject for playtesting in either case.



Avatar of the Bloody-Handed God

A shard of the Eldar God of Murder, the Avatars of Khaine are the most powerful entity the Eldar can unleash on their enemies. Requiring the sacrifice of an Exarch, the Young King, to wake from their slumber they are seldom brought to bear on the battlefield. When they do, however, they are terrible to behold and slaugher everything in sight.

Ws 10 Bs 5 S 6 T 6 W 5 I 10 A 4 Ld 10 Sv 3+/4+

Molten Rock: The Avatar of Khaine is a living form of molten rock and metal, which forms a adamantium hard crust granting the Avatar a 3+ Armour Save.

The Wailing Doom: This blade is used as a focus of the fires of the Avatars mind. Counts as a firepike, and grants the Avatar +1 strength in close combat.

A God Walks the Earth: Enemies in locked in combat with the Avatar suffer a -1 modifier to their Leadership.

Monstrous Creature: See the USR section of the Warhammer 40k rulebook.

Aura of Khaine: All Eldar in close combat within 12" of the Avatar is Fearless and gain the Preferred Enemy USR.

Daemon: The Avatar isn't quite corporeal, and draws upon the Warp for energy. The Avatar has a 4+ Invulnerable Save.

The Fires of War: Faced with the immense heat emmitted by the Avatar, most enemies flinch and try to protect themselves. All enemies locked in combat with the avatar have to take a morale check at the beginning of each Close Combat phase. If they fail, they will only hit the Avatar on 6's.

Size 3 target.



/Adrian

athamas
25-05-2005, 22:49
i like the idea for a fire pike, as some avatars have spears.. which they throw...


and S7 is good, but stops marines from moaning about instant death!

Cloudscape_online
26-05-2005, 00:18
Modify rule: The Fires of War

Furnace of battle

Faced with the immense heat emmitted by the Avatar, most enemies flinch and try to protect themselves. All enemies locked in combat with the Avatar can only hit on a 5+. In addition to this all models within 2" at the end of the combat phase, friend or foe, take a single S3 hit from the avatar's blistering prescence, normal armour saves allowed.

Delicious Soy
26-05-2005, 00:58
I'll make a slightly more sedate version:

WS: 10
BS:0
S: 6
T: 6
W: 4
I: 6
A: 4
Ld: 10

Monstrous Creature: The avatar is a colossus, Striking foes with impunity, destroying tanks at a whim and towering over the battlefield.

Molten Iron: The avatar has iron for flesh and molten fire for blood, Bestriding the battfield, he ignores even the ravagening enrgies of lascannons and artillery. 3+ armour save/4+ Invulnerable

Wailing Doom: The terrifying wails of this blade as it tastes flesh is enough to drive even the most stalwart foe to flight. If the Avatar inflicts any unsaved wound the opposing unit must take a break test.

Khaine Incarnate: A fragment of their wargod, Eldar feed and feel the urges of war in his vincinity, losing any sense of fear. Eldar within 12" of the avatar may re-roll failed morale and pinning checks. If in the same assault as the Avatar, all eldar become fearless.

The cost should be somewhere between 250 and 300 points.

khirsath
26-05-2005, 01:44
Here's my two cents:
- I think that the Avatar needs to have a higher initiative then it has now. At the moment its lower than the exarch sacrificed to awaken it.
- I like the psychological effects of the Wailing Doom suggested so far. Also variations of the weapon having different effects; a spear could be thrown, a sword may give it an extra attack, an axe granting higher strength, etc.
- His presence definately should boost the moral of Eldar on the field (maybe boost the moral of dark eldar too if your opponent is using them).
- The heat of the Avatar should make it difficult to get close to him. I like Sgt John Keel idea, but would add an effect of frag grenades to represent the fiery charge the Avatar would have.
- And an invulnerable save equivalent to greater daemons is necessary.
- He should have fleet of foot, the Eldar are supposed to be fast. So why not their god?

Scythe
26-05-2005, 08:59
I must say I agree with Delicious Soy's version the most, altough Sgt John Keels is not bad per se. The only thing that strikes me a bit is the W5 part. There is not any particular reason why the avatar would have more wounds than say a Bloodthirster, Hive Tyrant or other greater daemon.

Sgt John Keel
26-05-2005, 10:21
I must say I agree with Delicious Soy's version the most, altough Sgt John Keels is not bad per se. The only thing that strikes me a bit is the W5 part. There is not any particular reason why the avatar would have more wounds than say a Bloodthirster, Hive Tyrant or other greater daemon.

I wasn't quite sure about the wound characteristics of the current avatar, and I forgot to look up the Greater Daemons. Five might be a little overpowering, but you have to take into account that he has to walk all the way over the battlefield, not being summoned like the Greater Daemons.

/Adrian

Scythe
26-05-2005, 10:27
That's true, but Tyranid Hive Tyrants and Carnifexes got the same problem. They might have better armour, but they don't have an invulnerable save.

Delicious Soy
26-05-2005, 11:48
- He should have fleet of foot, the Eldar are supposed to be fast. So why not their god?He really sohuldn't for two reasons.

1) If he's upgraded, he'll be a powerful anchor in the Eldar army. In a fast army like the eldar something like that needs to be slow to give the enemy a chance to engage it otherwise its drastically unfair.

2) Unlike his fleet footed fellows, the avatar is a huge burning lump of metal, something not prone to graceful bounding :p

He Who Laughs
26-05-2005, 13:03
So it looks like the general concensus is that the Saves should be upped... I agree, I think GW was still a little afraid of giving things invulnerable saves AND armour saves (think early Termies) in the early stages of 3rd Ed.

In regards to the Aspect/Exarch ideas - I think there is some merit in there. However, even though it sounds cool and is very nifty, I can't see the particular Exarch sacrificed to awaken Mister MagmaPants actually affected his stats - the Aspects are facets of the Avatars skills, not the other way around.

This variation has never been mentioned in the fluff, though variation in the Wailing Doom is often mentioned (or Whaling Doom as lord_blackfang put it - I'm still wiping the tears from my eyes from laughing so hard!! :D ).
So instead of the battlecannon it used to be in 2nd Ed (for those who didn't play 2nd Ed - I ***** you not, the Wailing Doom was a battlecannon that had the same stats - minus the blast - when used in close combat :eek: ) - its weapon abilities should be closer to a flamer template effect. Plus all the psychological effects.

I think that the Exarch idea should be built upon though- ie, the army must have a certain amount of Aspects/Exarches in the army before you can include him (though this shouldn't be a problem for most people).

Solarc
26-05-2005, 16:15
I like your version of the Avatar, Delicious Soy. It's simple and more playable.

Hopefully some of the GW folks have had a chance to see the ideas presented here.. Not likely, but who knows?

Scythe
26-05-2005, 17:00
Well, some gw employees were known to visit old portent. Haven't seen anyone around tough since portent died...


So it looks like the general concensus is that the Saves should be upped... I agree, I think GW was still a little afraid of giving things invulnerable saves AND armour saves (think early Termies) in the early stages of 3rd Ed.

Unlike later in 3rd edition, were they gave armour/invulnerable saves to things that far from deserved it (bloodletters anyone? I bear a metal belt, so I get a ******** 3+ armour safe!!! :wtf: And also, because Khorne is so uber cool, khorne lesser daemons get Ld10 instead of 8... :eyebrows: )

Azazel
26-05-2005, 21:16
And also, because Khorne is so uber cool, khorne lesser daemons get Ld10 instead of 8... :eyebrows: )

Because Khorne is the most powerful God in a galaxy of pure violence. His Daemons should be more powerful. Although yea the 3+ save is funny.

As for the Avatar, I agree with the Saves ideas. When the new book comes out I suspect he'll have (AT LEAST) 4+Inv possibly a 3+ armour save to.

A far less likly improvement would be give him Str 7 Toughness 7. I mean comon, he had Str and Toughness 8 in 2nd ed. Back then the Avatar was the cheif opponent of the Bloodthirster. Many a game was decided when one of them fell to the other. :evilgrin:

Sgt John Keel
26-05-2005, 21:17
That's true, but Tyranid Hive Tyrants and Carnifexes got the same problem. They might have better armour, but they don't have an invulnerable save.

Wings, T 7, Regeneration, 2+/6+ Saves? ;) (just nit picking), and in the Tyranid army there's that much else to care about before the Carnifex.

/Adrian

Great Harlequin
26-05-2005, 22:09
I think the Avatar should live up to it's description in the fluff as a fighter without equal:

Here would be my propersition,

WS - 10
BS - 0
S - 8
T - 6
I - 5
W - 4
A - 4
Ld - 10
Sv - 3+/4+

Giving it the strength of eight means it has a chance to scratch a Monolith in combat and be on equal terms with a bloodthirster.

The Wailing doom should also have some special stats.

grizzly ruin
27-05-2005, 08:50
Wow this thread got rolling without me! (I was in transit for 25 hours :cries: )

Anyway, so much to respond to, I'll give a shot.


4+ Inv would be ok... How about making it unique? Always gets 4+ save... Represents his "this is a bit of a god"..

I agree with self biased, that not only is rule-breaking stuff like this a pain gamewise, and unecessary, it also get's players upset. Which is why so many people hate the monolith.



Kahadras Maybe certain things could change about the avatar depending on what type of Exarch was sacrificed. A Striking scorpion would make the Avatar tougher (increase toughness), A Howling banshee would make it quicker (inceased initative or always goes first in hth). A Swooping Hawk would make it faster. A Dark Reaper would make Wailing Doom more powerful. I dunno but it certainly would be cool.

I find that idea really appealing and cool, I also think it's unfortunately over-complicated for the current 40K system.

Not to mention that probably 1 or 2 Aspects would shine as the best choice, or most popular and all of the other ones would just take up space in the Eldar codex.


And the Avatar can awake without the sacrifice of the Young King, as noted in Shadow Point.

I wouldn't really go by anything in BL publications to make rules by, as part of dramatic liscence they tend to ignore/warp/break a lot of ideas that are part of the 40k system.


Modify rule: The Fires of War

Furnace of battle

Faced with the immense heat emmitted by the Avatar, most enemies flinch and try to protect themselves. All enemies locked in combat with the Avatar can only hit on a 5+.

I think that's over the top.

For one thing, he already has a WS of 10. For another, I really think other creatures like Bloodthirsters, Daemon Princes, Hive Tyrants, could really care less what kind of fire he's made of as alot of them have their own invulnerable saves.

It might be good vs. bog standard troops, but you're getting into the realm of "too complicated" with a rule like this if you have to make it so specific as to which units are and are not affected by this.


I think Delicious Soy's version is the most realistic and balanced, I'm not sure he deserves an I6 though, other GDs only have an I4 IIRC.


Giving it the strength of eight means it has a chance to scratch a Monolith in combat and be on equal terms with a bloodthirster.

I disagree that he should be as physically powerful as a BT.

Now he'll have a better WS, better init, and equal ST to the BT?

It should remain as it is, Raw power vs. Skill

WS 10 vs. 9
ST 8 vs. 6 or 7


Also, exlcuding a few posters, very few people have come up with drawbacks to go along with the upgrades. Try and think beyond the fluff here, this is for a game system as well and requires balance.

Some good arguements have been made for things like no advanced movement.

What about an opposite to the inspiring rule?

So yes, the Avatar inspires the Eldar around him. What if he is destroyed in combat?

This should have some kind of demoralizing effect on the troops.

Sgt John Keel
27-05-2005, 10:42
I wouldn't really go by anything in BL publications to make rules by, as part of dramatic liscence they tend to ignore/warp/break a lot of ideas that are part of the 40k system.

I know, but as the Execution Hour/Shadow Point were given status as official Eye of Terror publications, I think I'm safe to use that.

And why should it have drawbacks? The C'Tan don't, the Greater Daemon don't, the TMCs don't.

/Adrian

Solarc
27-05-2005, 13:21
Drawbacks?

Why should he have drawbacks? He's a got the essence of a god. No sense in giving the Avatar a drawback just for the sake of a drawback.

Hell, I'm upset that Wraithguard have wraithsight as a drawback... but at least I'm told why it's justified (Here is to hoping the get rid of wraithsight in the new codex!) But we shouldn't hand out drawbacks "just because".

Cloudscape_online
27-05-2005, 15:19
Powerful units will cost lots of points. The easiest way to bring the cost down is to introduce a drawback that reduces the cost of that unit. The larger the cost reduction, the bigger or more drawbacks there will be.

Solarc
27-05-2005, 15:29
Powerful units will cost lots of points. The easiest way to bring the cost down is to introduce a drawback that reduces the cost of that unit. The larger the cost reduction, the bigger or more drawbacks there will be.

Nope. Really, really, really bad way to go about it. Giving drawbacks for the sake of availability and bringing down the cost is bad. That kind of approach is fundimentaly Bad Game Design. Period. Leads to broken units and unhappy players. Most of the GW game designers know this or have learned it in their tenure.

Great Harlequin
27-05-2005, 17:41
I disagree that he should be as physically powerful as a BT.
Now he'll have a better WS, better init, and equal ST to the BT?
It should remain as it is, Raw power vs. Skill
WS 10 vs. 9
ST 8 vs. 6 or 7
So yes, the Avatar inspires the Eldar around him. What if he is destroyed in combat?
This should have some kind of demoralizing effect on the troops.
Yes but when it comes to it strength does defeat skill in 40k. Shouldn't the Wailing Doom should have a strengthening effect on the Avatar? But I do agree that the Avatar being killed would be a major drawback for the Eldar. Perhaps he could be used like the Ethereal. When he dies every Eldar unit on the table should take an unmodified leadership test.

Scythe
27-05-2005, 18:28
S7 may be more realistic in that case (as final stat, including any modifiers from the Wailing Doom).

Also, I like a drawback now and then. It usually gives some character to a unit without being absolutely the end of your army if it kicks in. Remember even Chaos greater daemons got a drawback, in the form of instability.

Solarc
27-05-2005, 19:20
[snip] Remember even Chaos greater daemons got a drawback, in the form of instability.

Instability affects all daemons, not just Chaos greater deamons. The instability concept for deamons goes way back, even before Rogue Trader (Appears in the earliest editions of Warhammer). It's got a fluffy basis and a history.

There is no such animal when we are talking about the Avatar. And making stuff up and adding it as a disadvantage, while it's been done by GW in the past, is not a good way to keep your players happy. Don't give your players sour grapes if you don't have to.

Scythe
27-05-2005, 20:57
It's not like you would be making stuff up, just representing fluff in a more gamewise way, either in a negative or positive way for the unit/character, it still adds character to the unit. Look at the Whailing Doom. A lot of people want the weapon to represented gamewise (well, a point can be made cause it was in 2nd edition, but still) because of the fluff and meaning behind it. And I quite agree, just as I would agree that an Avatars destruction would cause some.... loss of heart to nearby Eldar, to put in in that way. Both things make teh Avatar more a character and less just another army choice.

And for greater daemons, their instability is slightly different from normal daemons...;)

Solarc
27-05-2005, 21:25
And I quite agree, just as I would agree that an Avatars destruction would cause some.... loss of heart to nearby Eldar, to put in in that way. Both things make teh Avatar more a character and less just another army choice.


An Avatar is not an Ethreal... and should not act like one. I for one don't seen why anyone would want to make that case... which is what I think this discussion points to. There has never been any such expression in the Eldar fluff.

As a matter of fact, If you read the fluff on the Avatar in a certain way... The Avatar is a tool of the Farseers of a craftworld. He's summoned when they agree that the path has taken their world to that point... and at no other time. The Farseers have to agree that it's time to bring forth the enraged spirit of the Wargod. The Avatar has no will of his own. He's a tool.

Cloudscape_online
27-05-2005, 23:29
Nope. Really, really, really bad way to go about it. Giving drawbacks for the sake of availability and bringing down the cost is bad. That kind of approach is fundimentaly Bad Game Design. Period. Leads to broken units and unhappy players. Most of the GW game designers know this or have learned it in their tenure.

I study Computer Games Design at the University of Teesside. One of the core modules for this is Games Design. High power effects always come at a cost. Resources and Time in the case of C&C, Points in the case of WH40K.


GW is a games company and will not sell many bloodthirsters if they cost 400pts a pop. Most Chaos players would only take 1 per 2000pts. That's a retail of £25

If the BT was 200pts with a couple of drawbacks the player might take 3 of them. That's a retail of £75. Money maths. I dont play chaos, or know the limitations on number of GDs' but the example still holds.

Twisted Ferret
28-05-2005, 08:19
I don't really know about the exact stats or that sort of thing, but I think he should definitely be better than he is now... about the equal of a Bloodthirster. I mean, come on - he's practically a walking god!

TomKamakazi
28-05-2005, 08:46
I don't really know about the exact stats or that sort of thing, but I think he should definitely be better than he is now... about the equal of a Bloodthirster. I mean, come on - he's practically a walking god!



Well he is a walking god... at least a small bit of one


I think there's been some good ideas about the avatar. I'm in the 4+ invulnerable camp, but I think that 3+ on top of it would be a bit much.

As for the heat issue, maybe it should work like Nurgle's Rot: Roll a d6 for every model within 6 inches, on a 5 or 6 they take a wound, normal saves apply.
Maybe it should apply to ALL models not just enemies... maybe not.

On the acid blood style idea, you could get the avatar exploding if he is killed. If he's like big water baloon of magma then out comes the ordinance template when he gets poped.

Solarc
28-05-2005, 12:36
GW is a games company and will not sell many bloodthirsters if they cost 400pts a pop. Most Chaos players would only take 1 per 2000pts. That's a retail of £25

If the BT was 200pts with a couple of drawbacks the player might take 3 of them. That's a retail of £75. Money maths. I dont play chaos, or know the limitations on number of GDs' but the example still holds.

That's an interesting theory... Unfortunatly, it really falls apart, even under cursory observation. People's buying habits are not influenced as you say.

Here is what I mean:

A couple of things 1st. This is long... some of you may want to move on because you know this tune...

Greater Deamons are a 0-1 HQ choice, just like the Avatar. You can't take more than one under any circumstances in an army limited to 1 force organization .

Let's take the extreme example, but I think you could use any Chaos Greater deamon and you'd see the same results. We'll compare the Avatar and the Bloodthirster.

If you go to any Rogue Trader tournament or belong to a club that plays regularly you'll find that practially (and I mean about 99%) every CSM World Eater Player that has an army of 1500+ points, has a Bloodthirster. At $50.00 (US) each, Greater deamons are pretty pricy... but pratically anyone who's taken the time collect and use a World Eater (and some who run Undivided Chaos armies) has a Bloodthirster. I can't remember the last time I saw a WE army that did not have one.

Not the case with the Avatar. At the very most 1 in 3 or maybe as few as 1 in 5 Eldar Armies that are capable of fielding an Avatar do so. (All Craftworlds, Vanilla, US). Most Eldar do not field an Avatar, especailly in 4th ed. I know quite a few Eldar players that don't even own an Avatar figure.

Why is that?

The Avatar as it currently stands is a model that has a major drawback... only a 5+ invulnerable save. Like you say in your example. It's cheap point-wise and cash-wise. Relatively speaking, the Bloodthirster is 2 and 1/2 times the points of an Avatar and is significantly more expensive (Bloodthirster is $50.00, Avatar $30.00 US)... but why don't more Eldar field him? According to the economic "Money maths"... practically every eldar player should use the Avatar. Conversely, Bloodthirsters are relatively more expensive in terms of points and $$. Fewer Khorne Players should have on or even want one because of the expense. Yet every Khorne player I know either has one, or is going to get one for their army.

According to your theorem above... this should not be happening... but it is.

Let me suggest that there are 4 reasons why 40K players will purchase and use a model.

1) Looks. It looks cool, it's fun to paint, and when it's on the table with the rest of the army.. it looks great. Looks count in 40K and directly affect sales.

2) Utility. If the figure serves a core or key purpose or even multiple purposes, then folks will buy it and use it in their armies. Models that perform one function well are popular. In the Big monster catagory... Greater Deamons do pretty well... which is why so many CSM players have them. How many Falcon and waveserpent purchases do you think people have made since 4th edition came out? I'm seeing lots of them now because most players have figured out that it's a very good multi-function model on the table. Utility is a big plus.

3) For the Fluff. People will purchase, paint and field a model or squad simply because it goes with the themes that they have either read in the GW fluff about the model, or the fluffy reasons that they have made up on their own. Fluff matters and the models that match the fluff tend to sell well.

4) Cost. Money is important. How much a model costs bears a bit on when it's purchased. Note I said when... not if. Given enough time, a GW hobbist will buy any models that fullfill points 1-3, as long as the cost is reasonable.

The reason folks have an affinty for Greater Deamons is that they score very well in 1-3 and while $50 is expensive... it's worth saving the money to spend on a GD. That's why there is such a high ownership rate of GD among CSM players.

The reason Most Eldar players don't use an Avatar is because reasons 2 and 3 are severly lacking. Biggest redeeming feature said about the Avatar today is "he can take a lot of hits" Whoopdie freaking do. Nothing to get excited about, and it's a big let down when people just ignore him in games.

Everyone says that he's too weak and scores really low in people's mind in the fluff catagory. His oldest, most recognizable piece of fluff, the Wailing Doom, is nothing special at all and does not really add in any meaningful way to the figure on the board. The current version is lacking correlation to the Fluff, since he's weak and lacks anything special that is written about in the fluff.

With respect to 1... The aesthetics of the current model are good to some and bad to others. Most everyone seems to agree that the figure is better than the last edition's model. That's not saying much, but most people think he at least looks ok.

That leaves you with number 4.... he's cheap. And you know what, most people can't get excited about a cheap model. Buying him, since there is no incentive, becomes mundane. Sales lag, becuase there is no motivation to purchase him.

Ok. That's about enough for one post.

Summary: In the words of Sting, "Your economic theory makes no sense..."

Scythe
28-05-2005, 15:01
True, but making him a monster pts wise does not automatically increase sales. Lets take the new carnifex as emple, a wonderfull piece of marketing strategy. The new carnifex would score quite high on all categories you mentioned. It's a very cool model (well, most people think it is at least), has a large utility (many different options, many variations), is extremely fluffy (can't imagine a Tyranid swarm without a carnifex, can you?), and cost is reasonable (well, not any higher than a monster of comparable size). So, most Tyranid players want one. But wait, a tyranid army isn't limited to one carnifex. In the old codex, a typical carnifex would cost about 150 pts and was a HS slot. In the new codex, carnifexes below 115 pts can be taken as an elite slot. This encourages players to buy more carnifexes and assemble them cheaper (pts wise). This wouldn't have worked if a carnifex was say 300 pts per model. Even if the model was worth those pts rulewise, you are never going to include several of these hulking monsters in a 1500 pts army. So you'd buy 1 and stick with that one. Now, with cheap carnifexes essentially not counting to HS, you can way more easily include 2 or 3 in a 1500 pts army, and so most Tyranid players want more than one carnifex. GW makes more money, and that is exactly what they wanted. Your 4 points made make sense, but an army list layout has also a huge influence on wether people buy a model or not.

Cloudscape_online
28-05-2005, 15:11
The Avatar isn't powerful enough to be taken seriously at the moment, and this is reflected in his rules and stats. That's why Eldar players don't take him, and take a Falcon instead. It's versatile, powerful and functional, unlike the Avatar who is a hit magnet and realtively free points for anyone with some heavy weaponry, which is-- everyone. I think the only exception to this is Orks, and the Avatar is very good against orks.

Why do you think that IG chimera sales are down? Too much money for something that is relatively weak, (Side and rear armour 10? where's my bolt pistol?)

Scythe
28-05-2005, 15:17
I think the only exception to this is Orks, and the Avatar is very good against orks.


Ever seen a big shoota in action? An assault 3 S5 weapon is the bane of an avatar, especially since most ork armies have at least 15 of them....

BS 2 doesn't really come into play anymore with that many shots. ;)

Cloudscape_online
28-05-2005, 16:34
Hit on 5+, wound on 5+, save on 5+. All hail Eris, All hail discordia!

But seriously though,
5 big shootas= 15 shots.
1 in 3 chance of hitting =5 shots hit.
1 in 3 chance of wounding =1.6 shots wound.
1 in 3 chance of save = 1 wound goes through.

Then there is of course the fact of CC. If the orks are shooting, they're charging too. The avatar might be left with 1 wound at the end of CC.

grizzly ruin
28-05-2005, 18:33
I know, but as the Execution Hour/Shadow Point were given status as official Eye of Terror publications, I think I'm safe to use that.

Good point, I'll concede.



And why should it have drawbacks? The C'Tan don't, the Greater Daemon don't, the TMCs don't.



I do not have the new nid codex yet, so I can't really speak accurately about that.

TMCs may not have a specific "drawback" as it stands now, but TMCs and GDs are very different creatures.

The TMC fills a very important role, at least in my mind anyway, in the nid list.


I'm not sure why Eldar actually need a role like "Gigantic Wrecking ball from hell" in their list other than the fact that people want fluff to be represented.


Which is fine, I'm all for that. I think there just needs to be perspective on how much of a wrecking ball the Avatar should become and what that means for the rest of the Eldar army as a whole.







And GDs do have drawbacks. It may not seem like much when that Bloodthirster is rampaging through your lines, but it does have a drawback when you try to get it on the field.

Namely, being forced to pay the points for one of your Aspiring Champions and Accept him as a casualty to summon the Greater Daemon.

And then if the AC is killed prematurely, you must take instability tests on a 180~250 point HQ. 3d6 vs. Ld, every point over LD is taken as a wound. You roll this every round.

You pay that many points, only to have the thing kill itself.






I feel the C'tan do have drawbacks, costing well over 300 points and having to walk your way across the field are definitely drawbacks, not to mention they present a drawback to the entire Necron army in that they are not necrons.

And therefore they subtract 300+ points from the phase out pool.

These are drawbacks.





So is that the best option then for the Avatar? Make him cost over 300 points, and he has to walk at 6" but when/if he actually gets there he'd demolish what's in his path?

Would Eldar players really be happy with this?







Drawbacks?

Why should he have drawbacks? He's a got the essence of a god. No sense in giving the Avatar a drawback just for the sake of a drawback.

Game balance.

And the balance of the unit as well. It would be pointless if the Avatar just became ridiculously expensive. I don't think many players would be happy with that at all.

Better to give it a rule like instability, or grant some form of drawback to the army that takes him in their list, similar to Necrons phase out and C'tan.





I don't really know about the exact stats or that sort of thing, but I think he should definitely be better than he is now... about the equal of a Bloodthirster. I mean, come on - he's practically a walking god!



I really think people take the "piece of a god" way too seriously.

If you haven't noticed, Greater Daemons are "pieces of gods" too.

The Chaos gods.

So we have Star gods, Chaos gods and Eldar gods - all who have representation on the table top.

Take the word god and forget any preconcieved notions of it's meaning.

In place of "god" insert the phrase "powerful entity".

And work from there.







Instability affects all daemons, not just Chaos greater deamons. The instability concept for deamons goes way back, even before Rogue Trader (Appears in the earliest editions of Warhammer). It's got a fluffy basis and a history.

And the instability rules for the minor daemons also provide game balance. Have you looked at the stats for daemon packs and daemonic beasts?

You don't get anything that points cost effective without a drawback.




There is no such animal when we are talking about the Avatar. And making stuff up and adding it as a disadvantage.

I disagree entirely.

For all intents and purposes the Avatar is a daemon.

Even the Daemonhunters rules treat him as such.

The word Daemon does not mean "evil".







Daemon
"Etymology: Middle English demon, from Late Latin & Latin;
Late Latin daemon evil spirit,
from Latin, divinity, spirit,..."

1 a : an evil spirit b : a source or agent of evil, harm, distress, or ruin
2 usually daemon : an attendant power or spirit
3 usually daemon : a supernatural being, ... , intermediate between gods and men

Link (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=demon)





I think from this point forward, the Avatar needs to be considered a Greater Daemon. There are already rules that set a precedent for this.

This does not mean he must have Daemonic Instability and that he is evil. I don't think that at all.

I thought this was why people wanted him to be as powerful as a GD, because he is one.





An Avatar is not an Ethreal... and should not act like one. I for one don't seen why anyone would want to make that case... which is what I think this discussion points to.

If he is going to provide inspiration to the troops.

If he is going to be a rallying point.

If he is going to be awakened from the heart of a craftworld, lead to the field of battle to destroy the enemies of their race.

If he is a "piece of a god" as you've said earlier.

Would not seeing him be destroyed be a bit disheartening for Eldar troops on the field?

Anyway, it was just a suggestion.





But what we are getting at is the heart of the matter here.

Eldar players quite often seem (I don't mean to single you out solarc, I quite like your arguments) to want the Avatar to be a Greater Daemon and C'tan and provide more to their army other than be a combat machine.

All this, a bag of chips, and no drawbacks.




I'm sorry but that is just totally unrealistic, and if that's what players spend their time thinking he should be, when the new codex comes out they will be disappointed I think.



As a matter of fact, If you read the fluff on the Avatar in a certain way... The Avatar is a tool of the Farseers of a craftworld. He's summoned when they agree that the path has taken their world to that point... and at no other time. The Farseers have to agree that it's time to bring forth the enraged spirit of the Wargod. The Avatar has no will of his own. He's a tool.

So which one is it?

Is the Avatar just a tool now? A wrench? A tank?

Or is he a piece of a god?

This is a big part of why fluff should influence rules only so far.

Because it is often unclear and contradictory.

It represents the viewpoints and ideas of different perspectives.

Fluff, is not meant to be exact.

Rules are.

Fluff is there to provide theme and creative backdrop for the army lists.




Perhaps the drawback for the Avatar doesn't need to be built entirely into the Avatar directly. It could be indirect.

Perhaps you need to take a certain number of a certain type of troops to get him onto the field.

Or perhaps taking the avatar restricts other FoC choices.

Or perhaps, he could take daemonic instabilty tests of a sort, a rule that might be something that might be linked to the faith required to keep him on the field of battle.

If X amount of guardians or another unit is killed and removed from play, the Avatar is weakened and is forced to take instabilty tests.

A rule like this could be desiged to make sure that the Avatar is leading the charge, and that he is there to be the focus of the army.

And to prevent anyone using cheap guardians as sacrificial squads to keep the Avatar alive.

If they go, he goes.

My fluff knowledge on Eldar is weak. So perhaps someone with better knowledge could find some sort of fluff justification for a rule like this.

I don't really need it, as i think new fluff can be invented. But I think fluff justification is required for many other players.

Scythe
28-05-2005, 22:26
Hit on 5+, wound on 5+, save on 5+. All hail Eris, All hail discordia!

But seriously though,
5 big shootas= 15 shots.
1 in 3 chance of hitting =5 shots hit.
1 in 3 chance of wounding =1.6 shots wound.
1 in 3 chance of save = 1 wound goes through.

Then there is of course the fact of CC. If the orks are shooting, they're charging too. The avatar might be left with 1 wound at the end of CC.

5 Big shootas is only the arrament available in a single biker squadron. And they're twin linked. An Ork army can throw out way more firepower than many people think. It's true that they only hit on 5s, but they can have up to 3 heavy weapons (well, acctually they are assault weapons, but they are comparable in power to other races heavy weapons) in each basic infantry unit, have heavy weapons on bikes, on basic trukks, on everything. If played seriously, the amount of fire an ork horde can produce is quite frightening, moreover since it's usually followed by charges with troopers with 3/4 attacks on the charge...

Anyway, why would an eldar player take an Avatar against orks? You just know it's going to get into combat with grots.... :D


I feel the C'tan do have drawbacks, costing well over 300 points and having to walk your way across the field are definitely drawbacks, not to mention they present a drawback to the entire Necron army in that they are not necrons.

Not to mention that they can't capture or contest objectives and/or table quarters and the like.

Delicious Soy
29-05-2005, 08:18
I'll help fill you in grizzly, and it looks like some Eldar player need a refresher course too.

The Avatar is not called into existence by the farseers, except by the most indirect of ways, The avatar is actually awakened in a far more uncontrolled method. As a craftworld prepares for war, the infinity circuit begins to become affected by the rising war lust caused by the eldar. As preparations continue the avatar, seated in his chamber at the centre of the craftworld's infinity circuit, begins to awaken. Fire begins to stir within and his call can be heard throughout the craftworld. The Farseers and exarchs gather outside his chamber to attend the summons, the farseers selecting a young aspect warrior (though this has stupidly changed in the EOT codex to an exarch) to be sacrficed to awaken their god. He is given the Wailing Doom, the shoulder guard of the avatar and a cup brimming with his own blood. He walks in alone to his doom.

It takes several hours for whatever ritual takes place to finish, but the furnace rings with roars and the infinity circuit writhes in agony. Finally the doors are flung open, knocking those waiting to the ground, and the avatar walks again.

The avatar is not a slave to the farseers, indeed in war they are subservient, though he probably doesn't talk to them directly, influencing their descisions psychically, the eldar in the army simply 'know' the plan and what is required of them.

So there we have it, avatars are daemons BTW, and have been treated as such since 2nd ed.

Solarc
29-05-2005, 13:26
Nice Summary Delicious Soy!

Like I said... You can only seen the Avatar as a tool, from a certain perspective. That perspective being.... the Farseeres are the ones that make the call... get swept up in the power. While this rising fire is reflected in the populace and especially the Infinity circuit, it's the farseers that make the deterimination. As it is presented in the WDs and the 2nd ed. rules when the Avatar was developed.... It's not like the farseers have complete free will about this... they get cought up with "the fire" as well as the whole of the Craftworld.


@ Grizzly - I never said that the Avatar was not a Deamon.. I said that he's never been treated like the other Deamons on the battlefield. He's never been subject to instability or any of the summoning rules... even after 2 opportunities for GW staff to "bring him in line" with the other "deamons" as editions progressed.

The developers did this on purpose, because of the fluff that Delicious Soy has so nicely outlined above. The main reason is that he's part and parcel a manifistation of a God, brought into being by the psychic fury of the Craftworld as it goes to war. He's more than just a deamon... greater or otherwise. He's a manifestation of a God and the Fury of that whole craftworld. It's a fundimental difference... which is why he reamains different from the other Deamon types, and IMO should remain different.

Isambard
01-06-2005, 08:42
Well, I re-registered with Portent just to post in this thread....

You have all seen 'Troy', right?

I kind of imagine the Avatar to be a bit like Achillies in many respects: he is the perfect warrior. He might lack the raw strength of a 'Thirster or a Ctan, but he is an awesome warrior and an inspiration to all those that follow him. As a result, I have been thinking about the following ideas...

First, although the Avatar IS a Daemon, and should follow some of the same rules, he has a physcial body made of molten Iron (not magma), so he should not get instability. He should be pretty tough, being made of iron and all that. The question is how tough?

We know how people react to T8 characters, so lets not take that route. I was thinking T6, whích makes him tough, but not too tough. Add to that a 3+ armour save and 4+ invulnerable, and we are almost there. Give him a nice 5 wounds, and I think most people would be happy. Finally, because he is burning iron and all that, no weapon can get a better wound roll than 4+, meaning that heavy weapons dont totally waste him, but he isn't invulnerable to normal weapons fire. He is not too solid, but still pretty tought to take down.

How about movement? It is true that Great Deamons have to be summoned, but how many ways are there to summon them so that they get into combat in turn 2 or 3? That can make em pretty fast (combined with the fact that some of em fly). Ctan are slow, but that is one of their few disadvantages, you can run away!

You remember the seen in Troy where Achillies takes on that big bruiser from the opposing army, right at the beggining of the film. He gently trots towards him, then right at the last minute breaks into a sprint and leaps over the fellow, stabbing him in the neck in the process. Pretty cool.

We could do that with the Avatar. Keep a normal move, no fleet of foot, but allow him to move an extra D6" when charging (and any court of the young king could do that instead of fleet of footing). Gives him a bit of extra pace on the charge without having him too fast.

OK, and how about some shooting? In 2nd ed he could throw his weapon, in some of the novels he can shoot burning iron at people (which is cool). Give him the ability to project a bit of burning iron, counts as a fire pike. Lovely!

And finally, combat!

We want him to be able to hit hard, but to be different to the other Greater Daemons and Ctan. So, what can we do?

Well, I see the Avatar fighting in 2 ways, in 1 he just wades through all the little people, as they aren't that big a deal to him, the other is when he comes across something worth fighting!

Lets see, WS10, I6, S6 (not too strong, he's more of the skill/speed type) and 5 attacks (bear with me on this one). So, how does he fight? Well, I was thinking every round of combat he chooses how he fights. He can either choose to attack all the little things around him, or focus on one enemy. In the case of the former, all models in bast to base combat take a wound on a 4+ (with no armour saves, he is monsterous), and all other models within his kill-zone take a wound on a 6 (vehicles take a single strength 6 hit with the 2D6 pen if they are in base to base contact, or a Strength 4 hit for those within 2"). The other option is if he find something worth hitting, and then the Wailing Doom comes into play.

The Avatar may pick a single target in base to base conact to be the sole recipient of his Godly wrath. That target better have a change of pants...

The wailing Doom thirsts for souls, which is pretty badass. Even a single wound can drain the soul of an enemy, and the Avatar knows where to stick it. Roll all the Avatars attacks, with the 'sustained assault' rules. When you have the number of hits, roll and add a D6 to it, then subtract the enemies Ld. That is how many wounds they take, with no saves allowed (invulnerable save may be taken against each wound lost).

Finally, add the current 'inspiring rules' and such, and you are done!

To summarise:

WS10, BS5, S6, T6, W5, I6, A5, Ld10, Sve 3+/4+

Special rules:
Monsterous creature (see universal special rules)
Daemon. The Avatar is essentially a Daemon and had the same vulnerabilites as other Daemons.
Iron Blood. No weapon can ever get a wound roll of better than 4+.
Leaping Charge. The Avatar assaults an extra D6" inches.
Burning Iron. The Avatar may shoot as if armed with a fire pike.
Master of Combat. The Avatar may fight in one of two ways:

i) All models in base to base contact take a wound on the D6 roll of a 4+, all other models in his killzone take a wound on the roll of a 6+, with no armour saves on any wounds. Vehicles take a single strength 6 hit if in base to base contact, a single S4 hit if in his killzone, with all hits doing 2D6 penetration.
ii) The Avatar may choose to attack a single model in base to base conact. Roll all the Avatars attacks, for every hit it makes it may immediatly roll another attack. When the Avatar's last attack misses, total the number of hits and add the roll of a D6, then subtract the targets Ld. The total is the number of wound the target takes, with no saves allowed (invulnerable saves may be taken against each wound.)

Against vehicles an Avatar may choose to fight normally.

Inspiring - see current rules.



Right then lads, how does that all sound?

Delicious Soy
01-06-2005, 13:07
Like it would cost 1,000 points. The key thing is that it while, yes he is a god, he must fit into the game, and this doesn't quite fit.

Sai-Lauren
01-06-2005, 17:25
Firstly, the young king is required to wake the avatar, but only at the start of a campaign, not before every battle.
Secondly, I can't really see the avatar being affected by which aspects exarch was sacrificed to it, they're much more of a gestalt conciousness than that - it'd be like a drop of tea in a lake, it's there, but you wouldn't expect to taste earl grey or assam if you drank some.
IMO, it's more likely that they would have become more like an avatar of their craftworld, taking it's traits to the extreme. So, have some powerful variations for the named craftworlds (along with FW variant parts) costing quite a lot of points (so say Saim-Hann could have fleet of foot, or the enhanced charge as Isambard suggested, whilst Alaitoc might be allowed a pre-game move), and a list of lesser powers for other, un-named, craftworlds which are slightly cheaper.


If you haven't noticed, Greater Daemons are "pieces of gods" too
No, they're independent intelligences that have dedicated themselves to a particular power, and been gifted with daemonhood. They're not parts of the greater entity in the same way the Avatar is supposed to be.

My personal feeling is something around the level of a greater daemon, but a little more expensive - after all, he doesn't need to be summoned and doesn't lose you an ex-piring champion ;) , but he's more vulnerable whilst on the way in and easier to avoid or waylay.

Drawbacks - the avatar used to have the same rule as Tau ethereals have when they die, that should be brought back, even affecting eldar troops that are otherwise immune to psychology. Maybe also an effect where all the eldar within say 12" get +1 to hit in combat, but are also +1 to be hit to represent the uncontrolled bloodlust the avatar engenders in the eldar, and also "blinding" wraith constructs so they may not act the way you want them to unless you divert a warlock to command them.

Scythe
01-06-2005, 19:03
No, they're independent intelligences that have dedicated themselves to a particular power, and been gifted with daemonhood. They're not parts of the greater entity in the same way the Avatar is supposed to be.


Not quite. Daemon Princes are humans (or wathever other being) who have been elevated to daemonhood for their deeds. Greater Daemons are just strait representations of their god, like the lesser daemons, altough they have an independent intelligence.

grizzly ruin
01-06-2005, 22:57
The developers did this on purpose, because of the fluff that Delicious Soy has so nicely outlined above. The main reason is that he's part and parcel a manifistation of a God, brought into being by the psychic fury of the Craftworld as it goes to war. He's more than just a deamon... greater or otherwise. He's a manifestation of a God and the Fury of that whole craftworld. It's a fundimental difference... which is why he reamains different from the other Deamon types, and IMO should remain different.


I still think you're getting too caught up on the word "god".

Ok, so the Avatar is the manifestation of the fury of the craftworld.

The Bloodthirster is the manifestation of the fury of Khorne, and every madman who has ever spilled the blood of another in anger.

These are subjective ideas based on the fluff and can be interpreted in different ways on who should or should not be more powerful.




He's a manifestation of a God and the Fury of that whole craftworld.


I still stand by my assertion that GDs are manifestations of "gods".

And I want to know what happens to the Avatar when the fury of the craftworld is spent?

What happens when the Craftworld that summoned him is taking a pasting on the field?

That was where my idea for instability would come in.


However, let's agree to disagee on this one. I will forfeit "instability" for the Avatar, in return you come up with a drawback of some kind so our idea of the Avatar avoids costing 350 points to field.



*snip*

I was going to respond to most of this, but honestly Delicious Soy has pretty much summed it up.

Still, there are a few things I simply cannot refuse...



We know how people react to T8 characters, so lets not take that route. I was thinking T6, whích makes him tough, but not too tough. Add to that a 3+ armour save and 4+ invulnerable, and we are almost there. Give him a nice 5 wounds, and I think most people would be happy. Finally, because he is burning iron and all that, no weapon can get a better wound roll than 4+, meaning that heavy weapons dont totally waste him,

First you say not to make him T8 because non-eldar players would go, justifiably, insane.

So you make him T6, which means you keep him where he is now, so far no problem

At this Toughness, S3 and S4 have a chance to wound him, where at T8 they would not.

*note: T6 means, S6 and under require a 4+ to wound.

Then you say to make it so that no weapon (or strength) can wound him on anything better than 4+.

Which pretty much reduces any S above 6 to being equal to 6.

Then you want to give him an improved invulnerable save and a regular save.



No.

As for the rest of the suggestion, I think it belongs in the category "Movie Avatar" and not "Table top avatar".






Firstly, the young king is required to wake the avatar, but only at the start of a campaign, not before every battle.
Secondly, I can't really see the avatar being affected by which aspects exarch was sacrificed to it, they're much more of a gestalt conciousness than that - it'd be like a drop of tea in a lake, it's there, but you wouldn't expect to taste earl grey or assam if you drank some.



Two very good, well made points (numbered by me for highlight purposes).



No, they're independent intelligences that have dedicated themselves to a particular power, and been gifted with daemonhood. They're not parts of the greater entity in the same way the Avatar is supposed to be.

I believe that is debateable (as it is fluff). And you obviously are not a Word Bearer devotee. :p

I don't disagree with you outright on this, with the exception of them being granted "daemonhood". I'm not sure where that idea comes from.

If you've got something to back that up, I'd love to give it a read, otherwise I agree with Scythe's assesment.

In my own interpretation of the chaos fluff, ultimately all of the daemons and greater daemons are each fragments and facets of various sizes, intellelect, and power of the greater force of chaos.

Even the chaos gods themselves fall into this in my mind.


My personal feeling is something around the level of a greater daemon, but a little more expensive - after all, he doesn't need to be summoned and doesn't lose you an ex-piring champion , but he's more vulnerable whilst on the way in and easier to avoid or waylay.

Well this would put him in a situation like the C'tan.

Nothing wrong with that really, I had hoped we could come up with something more characterful - but this would do I suppose.

So he has no movement upgrade, starts on the table and costs a butload of points.

Slap on "can't capture or contest objectives and/or table quarters" (thanks Scythe) and you're good to go.

Welcome to the 350 point Avatar.

I guarantee that Eldar players would go absolutely spastic if he costs more than a GD (without seeing all of the costs) and is *only* as powerful as a keeper of secrets or something.

I'm telling you it would be cause for Eldar player complaining that would probably continue well into 5th edition.

Then again, many of them will go spastic if any reasonable, non "destroy everything on the table" version of the Avatar is presented before them.



Drawbacks - the avatar used to have the same rule as Tau ethereals have when they die, that should be brought back, even affecting eldar troops that are otherwise immune to psychology.

You know, I really like you.

Thanks for pointing this out.

Why is it in discussions like this everyone is willing to spout off about the 2ed incarnation of the Avatar and how he was able to swallow entire table quarters, but noone ever remembers to point out important little things like this?




Maybe also an effect where all the eldar within say 12" get +1 to hit in combat, but are also +1 to be hit to represent the uncontrolled bloodlust the avatar engenders in the eldar, and also "blinding" wraith constructs so they may not act the way you want them to unless you divert a warlock to command them.

Interesting idea, I like it.

Sai-Lauren
02-06-2005, 11:01
I believe that is debateable (as it is fluff). And you obviously are not a Word Bearer devotee. :p

Nope, my chaos force is assault Iron Warriors (only a Defiler and a Land Raider in HS).
Daemon's being independant. IMO, only the strongest champions get made into daemon princes, and have to do something to achieve that. What about all the other champions who don't quite make it, but are too strong or useful to have their essences absorbed by their patron? Greater and lesser daemons.



Well this would put him in a situation like the C'tan.

Nothing wrong with that really, I had hoped we could come up with something more characterful - but this would do I suppose.

So he has no movement upgrade, starts on the table and costs a butload of points.

Slap on "can't capture or contest objectives and/or table quarters" (thanks Scythe) and you're good to go.

Welcome to the 350 point Avatar.

I guarantee that Eldar players would go absolutely spastic if he costs more than a GD (without seeing all of the costs) and is *only* as powerful as a keeper of secrets or something.

I'm telling you it would be cause for Eldar player complaining that would probably continue well into 5th edition.

Then again, many of them will go spastic if any reasonable, non "destroy everything on the table" version of the Avatar is presented before them.

As an eldar player (amongst all my armies), I'm not actually too bothered. The avatar is supposed to only be awoken for the really important conflicts, it's not something the eldar do lightly. Yet, how many eldar armies field him?
Admittedly, it's partly due to the fact that eldar don't have another HQ option except for the farseer. But with the autarch to hopefully be added, I don't personally see much problem with the autarch taking the avatars "slot", and raising the avatar's power level and points to match a greater daemon.



You know, I really like you.

Cheers :)



Thanks for pointing this out.

Why is it in discussions like this everyone is willing to spout off about the 2ed incarnation of the Avatar and how he was able to swallow entire table quarters, but noone ever remembers to point out important little things like this?

Wanting something for nothing? I think we'll just leave it as accidental selective amnesia though. ;)

Which does bring out the major point about having drawbacks. You can have all the drawbacks you want, but you have to remember them in the game, and dice rolling induced amnesia is regretably all too common.

Plus at this rate, the avatar will have more rules than the rulebook does. :D



Interesting idea, I like it.
IIRC, there was a rule like it in the RT era list (WD 127) (might have only been +1 on combat resolution though). I've just extrapolated it slightly, after all, it's the avatar of a war god, I think that would affect the troops near it ever so slightly, and as eldar are generally quite fragile, it really does become a double edged sword. You have to hit with everything at once and hope there's nothing left to hit back (Ok, we'll see a lot of avatars with Banshee and Scorpion honour guards, but that's a lot of points with very little sphere of influence).

aleitaan
03-06-2005, 01:19
My idea of the Avatar would be (taking into account the whole discussion):

WS 10
BS 0
S 8
T 6
W 4
I 5
A 4
LD 10

Monstrous Creature
Molten Metal: The Avatar gets 3+ armour save. In the shooting phase, he can spit out a gout of flame: flamer template, S5, AP4.
Leaping Charge: The Avatar assaults an extra D6" inches.
A God Walks the Earth: Enemies in locked in combat with the Avatar suffer a -1 modifier to their Leadership.
Inspiring Aura of Khaine: All Eldar in close combat within 12" of the Avatar are Fearless and gain the Preferred Enemy USR. If the Avatar is killed, all non-fearless units have to check on unmodified Ld or flee.
Daemon: The Avatar isn't quite corporeal, and draws upon the Warp for energy. The Avatar has a 4+ Invulnerable Save.
Wailing Doom: The terrifying wails of this blade as it tastes flesh is enough to drive even the most stalwart foe to flight. If the Avatar inflicts any unsaved wound the opposing unit must take a break test.

Cost: I think should be somewhere around Bloodthirster, maybe a bit less since he is not winged...

just my two cents... :cool:

Solarc
03-06-2005, 03:41
Originally Posted by Sai-Lauren
Drawbacks - the avatar used to have the same rule as Tau ethereals have when they die, that should be brought back, even affecting eldar troops that are otherwise immune to psychology.




quoted by Grizzly Ruin
You know, I really like you.

Thanks for pointing this out.

Why is it in discussions like this everyone is willing to spout off about the 2ed incarnation of the Avatar and how he was able to swallow entire table quarters, but noone ever remembers to point out important little things like this?


How about ... because there is no such rule in 2nd ed Codex? No such rule ever existed for the Avatar in 2nd.

If you insist that there is one... I'm going to have to ask you to provide us a page number.



I still stand by my assertion that GDs are manifestations of "gods".


He's not a manifestation of a god. He's a powerful spirit of the warp that serves a god.

An Avatar is not a Deamon. In fact in the 2nd ed codex it specaifically says he's not a deamon.

We might agree to dissagree about what powers that Avatar has or should have... but people should not make up stuff to make their point.

grizzly ruin
03-06-2005, 04:23
How about ... because there is no such rule in 2nd ed Codex? No such rule ever existed for the Avatar in 2nd.

If you insist that there is one... I'm going to have to ask you to provide us a page number.

Well you'll have to get it from Sai-lauren since she introduced it.



He's not a manifestation of a god. He's a powerful spirit of the warp that serves a god.

You demand quotes, yet offer none yourself.

Back this up, and then show me where the Avatar is a "manifestation" and where Gds are "powerful spirits". I'm sure there are quotes for these, however...

Then show me a quote that says "All manifestations of dead, forgotten and irrelevant gods are more powerful than, or equal in power to powerful warp spirits that serve currently active and thriving gods who rule the warp."

I doubt you will find anything that says such.

As far as I'm concerned the manifestation of Khaine doesn't really impress me, considering he couldn't even handle Slaanesh when he was around, much less as a fragment.


An Avatar is not a Deamon. In fact in the 2nd ed codex it specaifically says he's not a deamon.

Unfortunately whatever he was in 2nd ed is completely irrelevant.

The daemonhunters treat him as a daemon. That is what he is now. Nothing refutes this.

We were using 2nd Ed for inspiration for new ideas about how to balance the Avatar, so that may be why you've brought this in. However I believe for all intents and purposes he has been classified as a daemon.

I could be wrong, you'll need to show me something that is 4th Ed relevant that refutes this to change my mind though.


Cost: I think should be somewhere around Bloodthirster, maybe a bit less since he is not winged...

You've given him several special abilites he did not posses (and neither does the BT)

You've given him

Str 8, autokilling T4 (which only the BT of all GDs can do)
a flame template
an increased assault move
a 24" diameter of Fearlessness AND preferred enemy for surrounding troops
and units taking ANY unsaved wounds must take breaktests.


And he still doesn't need to be summoned, can claim/contest objectives/table quarters, and will not ever suffer from instability, and you don't have to kill a precious model to get him into play.

He should cost a good deal more than a Bloodthirster does.

I would say at least 250 - 300 points.








At what point will anyone accept that along with a boost in power an associated balancing drawback of SOME kind should be included? It's either that, or points sink.

Cloudscape_online
03-06-2005, 06:54
didn't someone say something about a cost of 350pts?

In anycase you would've thought that whoever is writing the new fluff, and whever is writing the new rules might actually talk to each other for once. And decide what dictates what. Fluff first, rules built around fluff. Rules first, fluff built around rules. By rules, I mean stats, weapons, special rules, etc.

Sai-Lauren
03-06-2005, 10:14
Well you'll have to get it from Sai-lauren since she introduced it.


a) He actually ;) - it's the name I gave my craftworld (and it's pronounced as Lau to rhyme with the noise you make when you stub your toe).

and b) it's from RT era, the original eldar army list which intoduced the avatar. WD 127.

Solarc
03-06-2005, 15:27
a) He actually ;) - it's the name I gave my craftworld (and it's pronounced as Lau to rhyme with the noise you make when you stub your toe).

and b) it's from RT era, the original eldar army list which intoduced the avatar. WD 127.

If I remember correctly, (and I had some folks confirm this prior to posting) in the RT era, if your Army commander died, everyone in 12" took a test. But that was any Army commander, not a rule that specifically applied to the Avatar. It applied to all races, not just the Eldar. If an Avatar was present in the battle field, he was automatically the Army commander... so the test applied to him.

In 2nd Ed. The Army commander rule was an optional rule. It's nowhere in the 2nd ed. codex like you claimed before.

The Army Commander test rule was thrown out in 3rd.

The Tau Ethreal test is different, because it for the whole army... not just freindly units within 12"

That's my understanding of how it worked.

So in conclusion... there was no special rule for the Avatar in 2nd, unless you played with the optional rule. And in the RT era, the rule only existed because he was automatically the Army commander.... not especailly because he was the Avatar.

So to say "let's go back to the way it was..." Means that every army should have the 12" break test for their commander dying.... not just Eldar armies with the Avatar.

Sai-Lauren
03-06-2005, 15:55
If I remember correctly, (and I had some folks confirm this prior to posting) in the RT era, if your Army commander died, everyone in 12" took a test. But that was any Army commander, not a rule that specifically applied to the Avatar. It applied to all races, not just the Eldar. If an Avatar was present in the battle field, he was automatically the Army commander... so the test applied to him.
That's news to me. Any idea where this rule was implemented, because I don't remember it, and the only source I'm missing from that era is the original Chapter Approved (which mostly reprinted stuff from WD anyway)?

I'll dig up the rules for the avatar over the weekend anyway.


there was no special rule for the Avatar in 2nd
I didn't say the rule was in 2nd edition, I said the rule used to exist.

You just assumed I meant 2nd edition.

Solarc
03-06-2005, 16:42
That's news to me. Any idea where this rule was implemented, because I don't remember it, and the only source I'm missing from that era is the original Chapter Approved (which mostly reprinted stuff from WD anyway)?

I'll dig up the rules for the avatar over the weekend anyway.


I think the Army commander bit was a standard rule from the RT Main Rulebook. Not sure though... I wiill have to check on it and ask around.



I didn't say the rule was in 2nd edition, I said the rule used to exist.

You just assumed I meant 2nd edition.

True, you did not say that. My mistake and I apologize for it.

But the Point still is.. the rule was axed because it was too unbalaning. Everyone would just go for your Army Commander figure and force a test. Annoying to say the least.

Bringing it back for just the Avatar would be too bad and unbalance the game for the Eldar.

I honestly think that the best version I've seen in this thread it the one that Delicious Soy put up. Stays true to the fluff and is not a game breaker. The 250-300 point price on that one is reasonable, considering what he'd be able to do.

grizzly ruin
04-06-2005, 01:44
a) He actually ;)

Sorry about that!


I honestly think that the best version I've seen in this thread it the one that Delicious Soy put up. Stays true to the fluff and is not a game breaker. The 250-300 point price on that one is reasonable, considering what he'd be able to do.

I agree with that myself.

Cloudscape_online
04-06-2005, 22:58
I concur. :cool:

Charax
04-06-2005, 23:31
Yup, Soy's one is a decent interpretation.

Out of interest, where did the idea that the Young King *becomes* the avatar come from? last I heard that part was deliberately ambiguous, with the Avatar emerging wearing the YK's sash (proving nothing at all). Totally against aspect-specific avatars.

grizzly ruin
05-06-2005, 03:13
I thought I'd just repost Soy's Avatar, slightly re-formatted.

I might put this into a thread in general containing a poll, to see how people feel about it.


WS00BS00S00T00W00I00A00Ld00Sv
01000000I060II60I040i060040I10003+/4+



Monstrous Creature: The avatar is a colossus, Striking foes with impunity, destroying tanks at a whim and towering over the battlefield.

Molten Iron: The avatar has iron for flesh and molten fire for blood, Bestriding the battfield, he ignores even the ravagening enrgies of lascannons and artillery. 3+ armour save/4+ Invulnerable

Wailing Doom: The terrifying wails of this blade as it tastes flesh is enough to drive even the most stalwart foe to flight. If the Avatar inflicts any unsaved wound the opposing unit must take a break test. (perhaps fearless units should be immune to this)

Khaine Incarnate: A fragment of their wargod, Eldar feed and feel the urges of war in his vincinity, losing any sense of fear. Eldar within 12" of the avatar may re-roll failed morale and pinning checks. If in the same assault as the Avatar, all eldar become fearless.

300 points

Solarc
05-06-2005, 03:41
I would agree with the fearless proviso, grizzly.

Final point cost should be adjusted with the rest of the balancing with the army. Lots of stuff may change, especaily if the Eldar codex gets traits like the SM codex... Could change the cost of things... Listing it as a 250-300 range would be better.

One other thing though. This is Delicious Soy's baby. Let him post a poll or at least make comments before you do anything. I think it's a good representation and I'd like to see what others might think of it, maybe garner some attention from the guys that have an ear or two with GW... But it's his baby... so he should call the shots.

Scythe
05-06-2005, 11:25
I agree, pts values can't be assigned just yet. Also, remember 300 pts is also the cost of the C'tan Deceiver. While he might not be able to claim table quarters and the like, his stat like is slightly more impressive.

hairyman
05-06-2005, 13:20
I agree... I can see the need to err on the side of caution when awarding points values, but I think 300 really is a bit steep.

The addition of a wound, the "molten iron" rule, a decent save and a couple of minor abilities just not justify an extra 220pts, IMO. I'd put him around 200 as he stands now (and make him a 0-1 special character, or put a 1500pts or above limit on his selection).

grizzly ruin
05-06-2005, 15:58
Final point cost should be adjusted with the rest of the balancing with the army. Lots of stuff may change, especaily if the Eldar codex gets traits like the SM codex... Could change the cost of things... Listing it as a 250-300 range would be better.

That's very true.


One other thing though. This is Delicious Soy's baby. Let him post a poll or at least make comments before you do anything. I think it's a good representation and I'd like to see what others might think of it, maybe garner some attention from the guys that have an ear or two with GW... But it's his baby... so he should call the shots.

Yeah I was hoping Soy would make a comment about it before we go through with a poll, and I'd put his name on it as the originator of the idea.

Actually my intention was to put the names of anyone who made a significant contribution to the thread discussion in the post as well.


I'd put him around 200 as he stands now (and make him a 0-1 special character, or put a 1500pts or above limit on his selection).

Well the Avatar now falls somewhere between a Lord of Change and a Keeper of Secrets.


Soy's version has a much better WS, and also has a 3+ save which those two GDs dont. He has two nice unique abilites, one that enhances surrounding troops (Wailing Doom, which could be really devastating and Khaine Incarnate).

You don't have to lose an AC equivalent to get him into play and he starts on the table.

I agree with the 0-1 stipulation (which is the same as other GD's actually).

And I think we should also make him fearless, because it would be silly not to.

So maybe he should be along the lines of 225 to 250.

Solarc
05-06-2005, 16:46
Making him fearless is appropriate.

Definitly 0-1 with at least 1000 point minimum or 1500 like hairyman says. Should not see him in small games.

225-250 is probably a good range for all that.

Let's see if we hear from Soy soon. The weekends are not always the best time for people to check the boards or email... especially if it's nice out!

I'm going to go play in the sun!

blitz589
05-06-2005, 22:54
Give it a real armor save like 3+/5+ invuln. and make it atleast 150pts.

grizzly ruin
06-06-2005, 02:18
Give it a real armor save like 3+/5+ invuln. and make it atleast 150pts.


Read

Entire

Thread.

Charax
06-06-2005, 11:45
Hell, if he reads any two pages of the thread, that'd do.

Icewalker
06-06-2005, 11:57
Avatar of Khaine

Avatar of Avenger

Avatar of Banshee

Avatar of Reaper

Avatar of Scorpion

Avatar of Hawk

Avatar of Spider

Avatar of Dragon


What about Avatar of the Laughing God? Just a thought. Anyway, I'ved read about 2 pages. I like the idea of asect Avatars and think 3+ invulnerable be good. Keep the profile as it was except for 5+ invuln. Well, maybe str 7

Charax
06-06-2005, 12:14
Out of interest, where did the idea that the Young King *becomes* the avatar come from? last I heard that part was deliberately ambiguous, with the Avatar emerging wearing the YK's sash (proving nothing at all). Totally against aspect-specific avatars.

Just in case you missed it.

Delicious Soy
07-06-2005, 06:09
Alright I'm back! Thanks for the kudos one and all.


Wailing Doom: The terrifying wails of this blade as it tastes flesh is enough to drive even the most stalwart foe to flight. If the Avatar inflicts any unsaved wound the opposing unit must take a break test. (perhaps fearless units should be immune to this)I'd be inclined to agree with that, otherwise an Inquisitor Lord might end up legging it because one of his cronies got in the way of a big choppy sword. ;)

In response to a few other things:

Special Character: I don't think the avatar should be relegated to special character status, though obivously he shouls be 0-1 (as he is now)

Points Restriction: Definitely, though I'd make it 1500pts. A lot of people seem to play at this level, and while I don't really agree with spending 300 odd points on a single model at that limit, some people will do it. In that case, its their funeral. Really he only need to be kept out of games under 1500pts where people are less likely to have the points to spend on dealing with such a monstrosity and whatever (tiny) company he has with him.