PDA

View Full Version : Tactica: DWARFS



Grey-Knight
21-02-2006, 17:48
since the release of the new dwarf army book, i feel that us stunty generals should band togeather and make a tactica, i know if might be a bit early for a solid tactica but i for one have played a couple games at least and using common sense for my judgements on the rest and as a 12 year vet id hope i have at least decent judgement :P.... Most of you know this works so ill kick things off...


CHARACTERS: Lords:

Dwarf Lord: Not many changes to stats but some nice new options for him to have which makes him imo more useful then he used to be, still nice and effective, high ld. combined with the ability to have some nasty rune combo's makes him an all around decent lord choice, the big drawback, as with all dwarf characters is that he tediously slow and unable to have a mount to speed his movement, this makes him very easy to avoid if so desired by your opponenet and a potental big point sink. However with some clever positioning and some manuvering he can be a force to be reckoned with on his own and only bolsters a unit with him. Onto his options, the new shieldbearers is a cool option for him to have, 30 points for effectively 2 extra attacks. All be it only str 4 ws 5 that don't use his weapons but still not bad at all for its point cost. I really see no true obvious downside to this upgrade except that he takes up some more room in the rank but that isn't to bad in itself. The oathstone can be very good in some situations and horrible in others, if you playing against a fast army that relys on flank bonus's and such to win combat this is an invaluable item to have, it also works well against armies such as empire for when their detachments flank charge they won't get flank bonus plus, even when not planted on the ground the unit he is with gains MR(1). However it has, as i can see it, one horrible flaw, the inability to move once the stone is placed, that means no persuit, and that unit is basically fodder for the rest of the game along with your expensive lord, all in all not a great upgrade because its downside outweighs its upsides.

Daemon Slayer: Not a good lord choice IMO, only 110 points true but he wears no armor and is a loner therefore he cannot join units except slayers and he cannot be the army general thereby waisting his ld 10. Also he has the least magic point allowance of any of the lord level characters which at 100 points is standard for most Lords he still is not worth taking IMO.


RuneLord: A good lord choice, preferable to the dwarf lord in many respects IMO. To start off he adds 2 dice to the dispell pool, bumping it up to a formidable 6 dice already not including any runesmiths. A decent fighter with 2 ws 6 attacks, not amazing and not ment for combat but just incase some pesky flyer tries to pick him off if you run him solo or he can at least help in combat if he is in a unit that is charged. Gromril armor standard giving him a 4+ save, then bumped to 2+ with a shield or str 6 with a great weapon and having toughness 5 makes him one of the most resiliant "spellcasters" in the game. I say spellcaser because of the anvil of doom which i will cover later in the article. Another big benefit of the runelord is the ability to have 150 points worth of runes, a disgusting amount of anti magic and all sorts of nastyness can be packed on if you so desire, the extra 50 points of items allowed can play a huge roll in your magic defense, which the dwarves are in need of. The anvil of doom is a great little piece of equipment at 175 points, risky but still it can be very useful in many ways, first of all, there is no way to stop it from working save by destroying it and that is no easy task for things that would normally be sent to do such as task such as skirmishers, scouts of flyers of most types. It has the rune of hearth and hold which against armies such as VC, khemri, ogres ect, can be very useful, also if struck with ancient power it is good regardless of who you play against. The rune of Oath and Honor can be amazing, it can be used to get flank charges, reposition much needed troops, and if struck with ancient power if can be devistating to an opponent because up to 3 units can move an additional 6 inches, and dwarves moving 12 inches per turn is a scary thought. The rune of Wrath and Ruin is also a great little rune, not because it does hits but because it slows units that you don't want moving and it also keeps flyers on the ground Ancient power just makes it disgusting as d3 enemy units get effected by half move or no fly and take 2d6 str 4 hits to boot. However for all its benefits it has some big drawbacks as well. These include the following, it immbolizes your runelord all game and makes him a sitting duck for things such as cannons, stone throwers ect. Also it prevents him from joining units to add his abilities to theirs, Also he only has ld9 which means your troops will not benefit from the higher ld that a lord gives. On top of all this the anvil is a very unreliable item at the same time, it can work wonders for your troops but it can also be a waist of points as turn one he can fry himself and there's 300-400 points down the drain. The runelord IMO is the best of the 3 lord choices because he adds the most benefits to the army and even though some of his better upgrades add some risk to his personal well being it can be well worth the risk.



CHARACTERS: Heros.

Thane:: The thane is a very usefull hero, a good combatant and the ability to have 75 points of runes. Not as many options as the lord still a formidable leader for an army and quite cheap as well. He can be upgraded with oatstone but not with shield bearers.

Dragon Slayer: An awsome investment at almost any game size. Only 50 points basic and an unbreakable T5 WS6 character. If you are looking for any sort of a speed bump the dragon slayer will make it happen. Slayer axes are amazing in many respects and if you just want to harras an enemy unit its great. However if you want to add even more surviveablity to him, give him 3 runes of striking, making him WS 9 and thereby forcing all enemy units under WS 5 to hit on 5+ and most units unless properly equipped will be wounding him on 5's or 6's. This guy is truely awsome, one of the best hero choices for what he can do. Also if you have a slayer unit in you're army he can be the additional punch you might need to take down a monster, break a unit ect, ect.. a great choice for any dwarf army. Only downside to him is if you don't position him properly he can be sniped by enemy shooting so just keep him close to any unit you feel like for a time being.

Runesmith: Runesmiths are basically the same as runelords but as hero choices they are slightly weaker, only add 1 dispell dice to the pool, but that being said are still bang on hero's and almost manditory to take at least one maybe 2 in an army depending on if you have a runelord for a lord choice or not. With 75 points of items available to him you can do many things to bump up your magic defence. Personally I like giving him the Rune of Balance and a Spellbreaker rune, not onyl does it take my opponents dice away, it also gives me a dispell scroll. In any game under 2000 pts one runesmith would suffice, in 2000 maybe 2 are needed in the game depending if you know you're going against magic heavy or not.

oma
22-02-2006, 20:15
just as a side note for the DRAGON slayer hero: if you give him +3 WS (becoming WS 9) then you have a unbreakable hero that most units hit on 5+ and wound on 6+ (or 5+) this may hold up a unit for several rounds and only cost 80 points, can realy create havoc..

Starbane
22-02-2006, 22:28
WS 8 would do the same with almost any troop, Give him the master rune of swiftness and 2 runes of striking

now he's almost impossible (untill they start shooting him to bits of course)

Grey-Knight
23-02-2006, 00:23
uhhh 2 wouldnt do it because you need to be double +1 to hit on 5s but still yea as soon as i get to the dragon slayer i will put that in the discription.

Atzcapotzalco
23-02-2006, 00:57
The runelord entry seems to be missing mention of the anvil of doom's unreliability, or of the massive disadvantage of completely immobilising the runelord and stopping him joining a unit. Also the runelord is only LD9 so you miss out on a LD10 general.

Grey-Knight
23-02-2006, 02:24
thanks for mentioning that, ill put that in right now :D

Mad Makz
23-02-2006, 03:21
I disagree with your assesment of the Oathstone, as it fails to mention the fact that you gain magic resistance 1 (quite cheaply at 20 points for non magic item equipment) however it does have the downside of not being able to put additional characters in the unit AND you can't combine it with Shield bearers.

All in all for 20 points I think Oathstones are highly viable, as you don't HAVE to use them and still gain the magic resistance of 1 (which would normally cost 15 points) so if you weren't going to have multiple characters in the unit anyway you are effectively buying a quite nice 5 point insurance policy versus being flanked (assuming you'd want the magic resistance of 1, which I think is a pretty sensible choice for any dwarf unit).

foehammer888
23-02-2006, 16:37
...AND you can't combine it with Shield bearers.
Where is this stated?

You also don't mention that while the Daemon Slayer can only take 100 points of runes, the least of all lords, he can only take Weapon runes. I may be wrong, but i think 125 is the max points possible that can be spent on only weapon runes (Skalf blackhammers Master Rune, then 2 25-point non-master runes). So, a 100 point limit isn't that restricting. I often find taking a thane as a general and a daemon slayer for pure assault is often a better use of points than a lord general.

Has anyone else realized you can get 2.23 thanes for the price of a lord, and thanes only lack shieldbearers, royal blood, 1WS, 1W, 1A, and 1Ld? Two thanes have 1 more wound than the lord, 2 more attacks, and 25 points more magic item allowance. On top of that, they get to be 2 places at once, making them harder to avoid.

Foehammer

Bran Dawri
23-02-2006, 18:35
Skalf blackhammer's master rune isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

80% of the time a greatweapon gives the same or better strengthbonus, and for the few cases where it doesn't, a GW inscribed with MRO Kragg and RO might does the same or better for ~25 points cheaper.

Tormentor of Slaanesh
23-02-2006, 19:18
Indeed. If you want a single slayer hunter then have a dragon slayer, they're almost as good.
My lord always reaches combat, his bodyguard is at the centre of my line, often facing the hardest enemy unit.

Freak Ona Leash
23-02-2006, 19:36
Skalf blackhammer's master rune isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

80% of the time a greatweapon gives the same or better strengthbonus, and for the few cases where it doesn't, a GW inscribed with MRO Kragg and RO might does the same or better for ~25 points cheaper.
Bah, one of the best weapon combo for a lord is Master Rune of Alaric the Mad, Rune of Might and Rune of Snorri Spanglehelm. 4 strength five no armor-save attacks that will never need more than a 3+ to hit and need a 2+ on most things. Does the job fine. Or, Master Rune of Smiting and Rune of Might. If you do absolute perfect rolling, that is a potential 24 wounds. This will never happen in a game, but still...

Starbane
23-02-2006, 20:18
uhhh 2 wouldnt do it because you need to be double +1 to hit on 5s but still yea as soon as i get to the dragon slayer i will put that in the discription.

doesn't the dragon slayer has WS6? so two would make it 8, and as most troops have only WS4...that should be manageable.
It would be stupid to take on a character with a dragon slayer, as you have no armour bonusses at all..

Mad Makz
23-02-2006, 20:19
As has been pointed out, WS4 still hits WS8 on 4's, you need WS 9 to make it 5+ to hit.

Steel_Legion
23-02-2006, 22:30
yup, i found that out the hard way today (flagellents V dwarf warriors, i though the flagelents would be hitting me on 5+, also didnt relise they were S5 1st turn with 5 men having 10 attacks...ouch!)

foehammer888
23-02-2006, 23:07
Try this for a dwarf tactic, for the more close-combat oriented among us.

Dragonslayer - dress for the occasion

20 hammerers, full command, standard bearer has master rune of grungi (no rule currently states that master runes must be on battle standards)

20 slayers, full command

20 slayers, full command

Now, advance the hammerers towards your enemy, preferably shifted to one side of the battlefield, with a slayer unit to each side. The hammerers are stubborn, and the slayers are unbreakable. As long as the slayers remain within 6" of the hammerer unit, all 3 gain a 5+ ward save vs. any shooting, removing the usual slayer weakness to missile fire. However, don't be tempted to put a lord with the hammerers, unless a different lord is your general, as his 12" leadership radius will be wasted on the unbreakable slayers.

Foehammer

Bran Dawri
24-02-2006, 07:37
20 hammerers, full command, standard bearer has master rune of grungi (no rule currently states that master runes must be on battle standards)

Dwarf book. Runic section. Banner runes. Introductory text. Read it.

As for the shieldbearer thing, read the dwarf lord entry in the list. It states that you can take shieldbearers for X points, or an oathstone for Y points.

foehammer888
24-02-2006, 11:17
Dwarf book. Runic section. Banner runes. Introductory text. Read it.

Have read it. Nothing in that text specifically states that Master Runes may only be placed on battle standards. It implies that master runes are often forged onto battle standards, but nothing says you can't take them on unit standards if they are of appropriate size (ie less than 50 points).

The old text in the 6th edition dwarf book specifically stated the "master rune battle standard only" rule. As a huge portion of the rune section of the new book is copied and pasted, if it was reworded it was intentionally changed.

Foehammer

Grey-Knight
25-02-2006, 15:18
alrighty i updated the list adding DS and RS into it, now i need oppinions of the master engineer, having never used one myself i am not to aware of his capeabilities however he does look quite promising on paper

Bran Dawri
26-02-2006, 12:34
The old text in the 6th edition dwarf book specifically stated the "master rune battle standard only" rule. As a huge portion of the rune section of the new book is copied and pasted, if it was reworded it was intentionally changed.

Because it hasn't been reworded?

6.0 said: "Master runes are placed on battle standards under the supervision..."

6.5 says: "Master runes are placed on battle standards by runesmiths under the supervision..."

See? No functional change. And it doesn't say: "Master runes are placed on battle standards, but you can place them on unit banners if you really want to, because dwarfs always contradict their own armybook and fluff." or anything like it.

Gratnuk Ironfist
01-03-2006, 04:55
So which Mr do you recommend?

Grey-Knight
02-03-2006, 00:06
MR's are tricky, firstly, what are you talking about, weapons, banners, armor ect?

Gratnuk Ironfist
02-03-2006, 05:02
I am talking about the Mr you want to put on a normal standard.

Bran Dawri
02-03-2006, 10:45
??
You can't put MR on normal standards. See previous page.

foehammer888
02-03-2006, 11:46
All I see on the top of the runic standards section is

"Master Runes are placed on battle standards by runesmiths in the temples of Grungi, Grimnir, and Valaya.."

Now I have no real idea how you are supposed to extrapolate to this meaning "Master Runes may only be placed on battle standards." It is an ambiguous fluff statement from which you are trying to extrapolate a rule. Maybe I interpret that as saying that master runes are not forged onto unit standards in the Ancestor temples? Rules for runes exist in three places.

1. the Rules of Runes page at the start of the runic section
2. the rules description after each individual rune
3. the lord/hero descriptions where they list their runic point allowance

Nowhere in any of those areas does it state "Standard Master Runes may only be placed on battle standards." Even in Q&A's on bugman's brewery GD's have admitted nothing in the book prevents the Master Rune of Grungi from being placed on a unit standard. It wasn't an issue with the old dwarf book as I don't believe there were any master runes below 50 points.

That fluff statement doesn't have rules implications, much like there are no rules stating hammerers must weild great "hammers". Fluff says they do, but rules only state they have great weapons.

Foehammer

Bran Dawri
02-03-2006, 18:56
Why would that piece of text be a rule? Where does it state, in so many words, "this is not a game rule".
If it says in the dwarf book that master runes are put on battle standards, that's the only place you can put them. Your interpretation also implies that
weapons keep whatever bonuses they normally provide, and rare warmachines may be inscribed with runes, as the only places where it's mentioned that they don't/can't is that little piece of text before the runes.

And I'm a member of the Brewery. To the best of my knowledge, no developers have made any comment whatsoever on the standard runes. Bugman gave the FAQ his best shot, and Gav answered a question on the rune of penetrating.
The only thing to my knowledge that is comparable is Grimnir's master rune for the slayer list which was in fact ruled to be available only to the slayer BSB.

foehammer888
02-03-2006, 19:35
On the bugman's Q&A thread


RUNIC STANDARDS
Q44. Are Master Runes limited to battle standards only, or can elite troop standards take them? According to the Storm of Chaos FAQ, only battle standards could have master runes inscribed on them, but the new army book makes no mention of such a limitation.

A. I believe they should be but its not noted I'll admit I was mistaken and it wasn't from a GD. My bad. However, this topic is currently in debate on the brewery as well.


it says in the dwarf book that master runes are put on battle standards Yes, and if that was all it said, i would say it was a rule and would have no problems. However, it goes on to say where the runes are forged, which has no corresponding affect on the game mechanics whatsoever. For your engineering rune example, nowhere else in the book does it say that flame cannons can have runes. However, Elite units allow "50 points of runic standards." It's printed in their unit description. It doesn't specify what type of standard other than the total value.

The point I am making is they had the opportunity to make a hard and clear rule if they wanted one, and they didn't.

It's not conclusive evidence by any means, as white dwarf articles are highly inaccurate, but Gav, the man repsonsible for the dwarf book, placed that same master rune on a unit standard of a unit of iron breakers in a battle report. If they release a Q&A stating no master runes on unit standards, I'll comply. I'm just stating that as of right now no such rule exists.

Foehammer

oma
02-03-2006, 21:11
But if we dont follow the Runic banner intro, why should we follow the Engeneering runes intro? i would gladly take a S8 organgun/flamecannon

Stouty
02-03-2006, 21:27
I hate to say it but I think you're right; that poorly worded, well hidden pice of text stops you from putting MrGrungni on a hammerer standard, which from a fluff point of veiw makes bugger all sense.

So I can't take the ward savey one, I can't take Strollaz, can't take guarding, no point in taking ancestors.

Yep, normal dwarf standards suck.

Bran Dawri
03-03-2006, 00:01
However, it goes on to say where the runes are forged, which has no corresponding affect on the game mechanics whatsoever. For your engineering rune example, nowhere else in the book does it say that flame cannons can have runes.

It doesn't say anywhere else that cannons, bolt throwers or stone throwers can have runes either, except for the runes that are for those specific machines. So technically, by your reasoning, I can put RO penetration, reloading and their ilk on either all warmachines or none. Your call.

Also, the irrelevance of the place of construction doesn't invalidate the previous statement in the sentence.


The point I am making is they had the opportunity to make a hard and clear rule if they wanted one, and they didn't.

They did. Without those introductions as rules, both weapon and engineering runes are either broken or almost completely useless. And either all these introductions are rules, or none are.


It's not conclusive evidence by any means, as white dwarf articles are highly inaccurate, but Gav, the man repsonsible for the dwarf book, placed that same master rune on a unit standard of a unit of iron breakers in a battle report.

Gav didn't write the new book. Pete Haines did. And WD batreps are indeed rightly famous for their accuracy :angel: . (I also don't recall that batrep, but I haven't bought WD except for the past december and january in a year or so.)

@Stouty: RO battle, RO sanctuary, RO determination, RO slowness, RO stoicism. Yup, regular banner runes suck allright :D .

gukal
03-03-2006, 13:26
I don't understand this debate on master runes for battle standards.

Under the old rules as clarified by Storm of Chaos Q&A, only the BSB could bear a runic standard with a master rune. Now, under substantially the same wording, there is no reason to expect a different result.

Unless further modified, the rules do not support putting a master rune on a regular Dwarf banner.

- Gukal

Atzcapotzalco
03-03-2006, 18:40
Debate is largely due to the fact that the Master rune of Grungni is the first master rune cheap enough to put on anything other than a battle standard, therefore the question was previously academic.
Plus whatever ruling may have been made regarding the slayer list, the wording is distinctly ambiguous. While there is an *implication* that master runes *should* be on battle standards, it is *not* specifically stated that this is exclusively the case, and *not* clearly forbidden to put them on a unit standard.
By comparison, the engineering runes prefix *does* specifically state, and not merely imply, that flame cannons, organ guns, and gyrocopters may not have runes. In that case both wording and meaning are clear, in the case of the standards rune prefix they are not.

While we are discussing fine dilemmas about rune weapons, what are general thoughts on this one:
Can a battle standard bearer, which could not normally take a great weapon, take a weapon with the master rune of Kragg the Grimm?
Came up recently when thinking up an army list. For the record I decided no and just took 3 runes of cleaving.

gukal
03-03-2006, 19:46
I believe there is no ambiguity left. The original text looked like mere fluff, I'll grant you. However, the official SOC Q&A eliminates all doubt as to the meaning of the phrase.

Q. Can a Brotherhood of Grimnir unit take a banner with the Master
Rune of Grimnir on it?

A. No. Although a Brotherhood of Grimnir unit may take a runic
standard worth up to 50 points, only army Battle Standard Bearers
may take Master runes.
S. Storm of Chaos Q&A; October 2004 Issue of White Dwarf Magazine (US #297 / UK #298)(emphasis added)

- Gukal

Gratnuk Ironfist
06-03-2006, 04:22
Yep, so Mr only on bsb. Who here purposefully does sucicide missions with the gyro asap?

WLBjork
06-03-2006, 08:03
You can't suicide with the Gyro - it doesn't crash anymore.

Now it acts as flying light cavalry, useful to decoy frenzied troops and harrass units.

Have to say I'd missed the "May move as normal if it flees as a charge reaction and subsequently rallies" section in the first read through.


Oh, and you can't take a GW with MR of Kagg the Grimm on a BSB as you cannot buy him the GW in the first place.

Bran Dawri
06-03-2006, 17:20
It appears I was wrong. Or, rather more accurately, I've been overruled:

(From the Brewery: )


Master Runes can be taken on any banner – although the introductory text implies that they are reserved for battle standards, there is no rule that explicitly states that they cannot be applied to ordinary standards.

Cheers,

GAV

While I still don't like it, I really can't argue with a ruling by Gav now, can I? Expect to see my hammerers with a MRO Grungni soon.

WLBjork
06-03-2006, 17:37
I can see where he is coming from really - no other race is forced to take a 50pt banner on their BSB if a unit can take it AFAIK.

Also backing this up is that the Rune of Guarding specifically states "Army Standard Bearer only"


Ah well, on the plus side, Organ Guns, Flame Cannon and Gyrocopters can now be runed according to that reply! :cheese:

foehammer888
06-03-2006, 18:30
Ah well, on the plus side, Organ Guns, Flame Cannon and Gyrocopters can now be runed according to that reply! :cheese: Well, not quite. He simply stated that the line included in the intro text for runic standards was ambiguous and could be interpretted in non-intended ways. He never stated that no text in intro sections for runes include valid rules (as I was originally arguing, incorrectly).

If that standard section had read "master runes may only be placed on battle standards" I would have said it was fine. However, it had some strange line stating that they were forged onto battle standards in the temples of the ancestor gods. Master runes being forged on battle standards in temples does not negate them being forged on other standards elsewhere. Similarly, if I say "I eat hot dogs when I walk in the park," I am not stating I eat hotdogs nowhere else, or that I don't/can't eat them when I don't walk there.

However, the engineering runes section states that "the following may be forged onto cannons, stone throwers, and bolt throwers." (or something similar, I don't have my book with me). There is no ambiguity in that statement.

Foehammer

Bran Dawri
06-03-2006, 19:30
Master runes being forged on battle standards in temples does not negate them being forged on other standards elsewhere.
Foehammer

The problem with that reasoning is that it doesn't say anywhere that my dwarfs can't "shoot laazer beemz out of there eyez" either.
Where such reasonings are concerned, I'm with MageIth who always says that you can only do what the rules say you can do, and where the rules do say you can put master runes on battle standards, it doesn't say you can do so on unit standards.

It's a moot point now, though.

foehammer888
06-03-2006, 21:08
The problem with that reasoning is that it doesn't say anywhere that my dwarfs can't "shoot laazer beemz out of there eyez" either.
Where such reasonings are concerned, I'm with MageIth who always says that you can only do what the rules say you can do... I usually agree with you, but that point is covered under the hammerer/longbeard/ironbreaker unit entry, in which it states

"the standard bearer may be given a runic standard of up to 50 points" (or something very similar)

As the master rune of grungi is a standard rune, and is 50 points or less, it fits into those restrictions. The rules are, in fact, telling you what you can do.


...and where the rules do say you can put master runes on battle standards, it doesn't say you can do so on unit standards. It doesn't technically say you can put master runes on battle standards, it simply tells you where runesmiths forge them onto battle standards. It does say "These runes (meaning all the ones in the standards section) may be inscribed on standards...They may also be placed on battle standards."

Foehammer

WLBjork
07-03-2006, 06:15
You can say so, although I disagree about the ambiguity of the statement.

The main core of the argument for me is:

1)No other army that I am aware of is forced to take a Banner on a BSB when a unit can take a banner of the same points value.

2)The rules for the Rune of Guarding.

However, remember that the ruling above is unofficial until it appears in print.
The official Storm of Chaos FaQ - which has entered print, and can be found on the GW Website - does prevent the MR of Grungi being placed on anything other than a Battle Standard. Until that is resolved, a rules lawyer has all the ammunition he needs to challenge the use of the MR of Grungi on a normal Standard.

oma
07-03-2006, 08:56
but.. isn't it only charecters who can take master runes? and a ordenary standard berer is not a character... does this makes sense?

foehammer888
07-03-2006, 11:43
Until that is resolved, a rules lawyer has all the ammunition he needs to challenge the use of the MR of Grungi on a normal Standard. Actually, if he is a true rules lawyer, he must abide by the statement that FAQ's only apply to the army they were written for. If he/she ignores that, then they are just a hypocrite. Be a rules lawyer or don't, I can respect both, just don't be whichever one is more advantageous to you at the time.


but.. isn't it only charecters who can take master runes? and a ordenary standard berer is not a character... does this makes sense? There's no link between characters and master runes. Actually, standards and war machines are the only cases where non-characters can take runes.

Foehammer

Bran Dawri
07-03-2006, 18:45
Regardless, what completely buggers me is how with the exact same wording they've given the polar opposite in ruling on this matter between army books.

...

Perhaps in 7th edition the 5+ ward vs shooting will become absolutely necessary? *shudders*

Gratnuk Ironfist
08-03-2006, 05:32
I have to admit I just love the ro courage, but was your favourite/most used rune with the older book?

Bran Dawri
08-03-2006, 10:37
Rune of battle. Rune of courage intefered with stubborn, and since I liked hammerers, that was a no-go.

For characters, a MRO swiftness was always somewhere in my army (still is).

foehammer888
08-03-2006, 12:31
Rune of battle. Rune of courage intefered with stubborn, and since I liked hammerers, that was a no-go.

For characters, a MRO swiftness was always somewhere in my army (still is).

Yeah, the combination of the MRO Swiftness, a rune of might, and rune of cleaving was one of my favorite combos. The weapon cost 70 points, the character always struck first at S5, which always helped removed an attack or two from charging units, and in the off chance the general was in b2b with a tough character or monster, he was strength 9/10 (depending on your interpretation on when you "double your strength," before or after rune of cleaving. I never argued much, as it rarely affected game play).

Fun part is now we can fit the weapon on a thane, with just enough left over for the ever necessary rune of stone.

Regardless, what completely buggers me is how with the exact same wording they've given the polar opposite in ruling on this matter between army books.


Foehammer

Bran Dawri
08-03-2006, 19:49
I usually just go with 2 Runes of cleaving with the MRO swiftness. 9 S6 attacks with half of them striking first is usually enough to beat even charging chosen knights with static CR.
No need to go around smacking characters when they'll run anyway :evilgrin:

oma
08-03-2006, 20:20
i am gonna try, MRoKragg the grim, and +2 attacks, 6 s 6 attacks is nice!

foehammer888
08-03-2006, 20:32
Very true, the problem with dwarf lords is you rely on your opponent to come to you. Dwarf lords are like electrical sockets, you only play with one once before you realize they don't play nice.

Other fun weapon combinations
"Thor's Hammer" - 2 Runes of Cleaving, MRO Flight: The cleaving runes get you S6 attacks, and the rune of flight gets you a single auto-hitting 12" shooting attack that can choose usually inelligible targets. Makes unit champions and skaven weapon teams cry. A little expensive, but still fun to work with. I believe even with only 1 cleaving rune it may have some potential when combined with a rune of brotherhood.

"The Jackhammer" - MRO Krag the Grim, 2 Runes of cleaving: striking last at S8? Wounding on a 2+ and a -5 Armor modifier for 15 points less than the MR.

I was disappointed about several things in the new dwarf rune lists

1) runes of striking/speed - does anyone ever actually use these?
2) master rune of smiting - is it just me, or would anyone else have prefered just to have it cost 35-40 points and cause D3 wounds? At the current cost it is very expensive for the rare situations where it is useful. Except against ogres.
3) Rune of skalf blackhammer - how is this rune worth it's points? for 40 points and no master rune I can get the same effect 95% of the time.
4) Rune of parrying - anyone else remember this from 5th edition? -1 attack to an enemy in base contact. I could understand 3 perhaps being a little too powerful, but that just means adding "additional runes have no affect" to the description.
5) Master rune of breaking - this is alot to pay point-wise for basically a character booby-trap. 90% of enemies know better than to get close to a dwarf lord. Now, in the unlikely event that some character actually gets in b2b contact, we are supposed to sacrifice offesive power to possibly negate the opponents offensive power? I only see this being used by a player trying to stick to the fluff of a Karak Hirn army.
6) Rune of iron - never seen it used, not when so much better armor runes exist

Also, does anyone know if the magic resistances from the various runes stack? For example, the talismanic rune states that it is a "cumulative magic resistance (1)" but the stanard rune does not.

Foehammer

Tormentor of Slaanesh
08-03-2006, 20:41
I use striking to fill up points allowance.
breaking in normal circumstances isn't worth it but in arena of death...

Bran Dawri
08-03-2006, 23:31
MRO flight + RO smiting is also nice. Autokilling those charging chariots :evilgrin: as well as taking a wound off that chaos lord or whatever before he's anywhere near you. (Back in fifth, one of my favorites was MRO flight + RO breaking. Bring on that hydra sword, b*tch.)

Rune of striking is occasionally useful, as tormentor said, to fill up points, and to make, say, a battle standard a little harder to hit (and hence harder to kill).
Agree on the MRO smiting and breaking (the latter is made worse because nearly every dangerous character carries a greatweapon, not a magic one).

I always did like the rune of parrying, and it didn't strike me as particularly overpowered even with three on a single weapon.

MRO Skalf: GW, MRO Kragg + RO might does the exact same thing for ~25 points less. Heck, a simple GW does the exact same thing 90% of the time for less than a tenth of the cost as well as leaving your entire runic allowance free for defensive items.

Gratnuk Ironfist
09-03-2006, 05:37
I used to always kit my lord out with Mro swift,cleaving and fury that would give hime 5A at S5, which really well. Then I started playing chaos and HE and someone mentioned Mro swift and two ro cleavings and boy let me tell you, that combo has skinned elves and opened up chaos knights like a dwarf to ale.

junx13
09-03-2006, 14:14
Very true, the problem with dwarf lords is you rely on your opponent to come to you. Dwarf lords are like electrical sockets, you only play with one once before you realize they don't play nice.

Foehammer

I agree... no one ... I repeat NO ONE(in my group at least) would willingly allow their characters to get into combat with a dwarf lord in a unit. 95 % of the time, with their superior movement, my dwarf lord just munches on some sacrificial unit he throws at me whilst his lord character munches on the rest of my army. Either that or the unit doesn't see combat at all.

Now, I'd prefer the Daemonslayer tactic or just plain plonk normal armour on the lord, add a couple of fury and cleaving, and save the points for more troops (and a longer battle line of course ;) ) But that's just me griping our stunty legs.:angel:

foehammer888
09-03-2006, 14:35
MRO flight + RO smiting is also nice. Autokilling those charging chariots :evilgrin: as well as taking a wound off that chaos lord or whatever before he's anywhere near you. (Back in fifth, one of my favorites was MRO flight + RO breaking. Bring on that hydra sword, b*tch.) I think you mean rune of might, not rune of smiting, but I get what you are saying.


I agree... no one ... I repeat NO ONE(in my group at least) would willingly allow their characters to get into combat with a dwarf lord in a unit. 95 % of the time, with their superior movement, my dwarf lord just munches on some sacrificial unit he throws at me whilst his lord character munches on the rest of my army. Either that or the unit doesn't see combat at all. Which I why I have started investigating interesting weapon options at or below 70 points., as those fit on a thane with the obligatory rune of stone. Two thanes are much harder the avoid than a single lord, and often come out to about the same point cost.


Now, I'd prefer the Daemonslayer tactic or just plain plonk normal armour on the lord, add a couple of fury and cleaving, and save the points for more troops (and a longer battle line of course ) But that's just me griping our stunty legs. Now that the Daemonslayer is so much cheaper than the lord, he's a steal for a killing character. Don't stick him in a unit and he's got a 360 degree charge arc. Add to that the fact that he'll allow a second slayer unit in the army.

Now, I ask this question because of the MRO Smiting and RO parrying discussions, and that my dwarf army is themed around Karak Kadrin. Does anyone else think that Ungrim Ironfist is one of the worst special characters points-wise in the WHFB game? True he is basically an unbreakable lord with the slayer skill, but unbreakable is only good if he is in a unit of slayers or on his own. When I ran the numbers, he costs 465 points, and under the current rule book has 215 points of runes, costing 250 points naked. This means he is paying over a hundred points and an extra hero slot for unbreakable and the ability to always wound on a 4+. That's more than you pay for an entire daemon slayer.

Add to that the fact that his runes aren't all that effective
- only a 3+ armor save (same as a basic warrior)
- 4+ ward save (decent)
- one additional wound (don't think it is worth the points)
- immune to fire (hardly ever useful)
- rune of luck ( can be useful, but I think he was priced point-wise when this rune was more flexible)
- rune of smiting (only worth it against characters and large monsters, which Ungrim is very good against, but as a result, no character or monster would ever get in combat with him)
- rune of parrying (basically always useful)

Add to that the fact that he can't ride a shield, have an oathstone, and doesn't technically have royal blood or the ability to allow you to take additional slayer units. I was hoping to have that updated in the dwarf special character white dwarf article, but no luck.

Foehammer

Bran Dawri
09-03-2006, 15:53
I think you mean rune of might, not rune of smiting, but I get what you are saying.

Err, duhh. *Smacks self for such a stupid typo.*

I personally tend to deploy my forces in such a way that my opponent has no choice but to take on the lord (or get flankcharged by a unit hammerers with him in it) or draw/suffer a minor loss.
The only units of mine that he can get at without taking him on are my warmachines, thunderers and slayers, and these usually can get their own back or more, resulting in a draw.

Gratnuk Ironfist
20-05-2007, 06:05
I have to admit that the ro preservation is a brilliant idea and allows alot more safety when facing undead and lizards, but I'd still put it on my runesmiths first.

Anyone still sticking with the sheildbearers?

heretics bane
20-05-2007, 16:07
sometimes but not that often they do add a +2 to the armour save and 2 more attacks and immune to killing blow for +25pts not bad

Gratnuk Ironfist
23-05-2007, 05:57
Do sheildbeaerers make a lord immunet to killing blow?

Oberon
23-05-2007, 10:56
Yes, with shieldbearers lord has US3, therefore he is immune to KB.

Frankly
23-05-2007, 11:07
I like the model, he's worth using just because its so cool.

Lord Firmshaft
23-05-2007, 15:39
for a complete dwarf tactica go to bugmans brewery, it has a complete breakdown for each troop type, how to use it, deployment advice, tactics, sample army builds, everything you could ask for using the dawi

Gratnuk Ironfist
24-05-2007, 05:56
for a complete dwarf tactica go to bugmans brewery, it has a complete breakdown for each troop type, how to use it, deployment advice, tactics, sample army builds, everything you could ask for using the dawi

Ah,ha,ha :D I was waiting for that. Yeah bugmans brewery is great, but its too big. I stick to Khazad Grom, smaller and warmer. (Also get a plenty of beer.)

With killing blow in 7th ed, does it still work on a 6 when rolling to wound?

Oberon
24-05-2007, 09:17
Killing blow hasnīt changed in 7ed, except maybe that US2 and under-restriction. So yes, still "6" to wound is autokill with no armour saves. Wards are still ok.

Gratnuk Ironfist
25-05-2007, 06:14
That's great.:D I might consider sheildbearers in my list now esp. verse those darn VC.

What do you think of the rules for King Alrik?