PDA

View Full Version : Bretonnian Wishlisting!



Pages : [1] 2

Kisanis
13-10-2010, 19:37
With the somewhat sodium heavy rumour of a new Bret Book out in July/August and fantasy being a good few months in, I was wondering what everyones opinions are of the strengths and weaknesses of the Current Bret book and what they think would help put them into a solid footing against the variety and strength of the Empire book.

Personally...

A Bret Magic lore, I feel that our current restrictions on lores really stagnates the brets. However 8th did a MASSIVE improvement on viable bret magic users.

Improving knights - Not stats, or even equipment, but allowing somehting to give knights variety. For example allowing all Knight Champions magic items of varying points limit (I feel the current situation with banners is the right idea, but banner variety is somewhat lacking; again the 8th update helped this, but I feel more can be done).
Another possibility would be Unit-Wide virtues (either per model or squad). This would REALLY help make the brets look like their own army, and not just some backwards empire cousin (I really love bret fluff, but their rules are just limited Empire rules with some pseudo-french thrown in... imho)

Another infantry choice! M@A are fantastic horde infantry, but I feel the lack of reliable cc core infantry really limits the bret playstyle. Maybe a 0-1 household infantry unit, more points, but more viable as well?

Make Virtues for characters not count towards their Magic item limit! It would require some point tweaking, but I think it would really add to variety and build combinations.

Feel free to throw in!

sulla
13-10-2010, 19:43
Knights on foot (for sieges) and the trebuchet reduced to s4. Shields optional on men at arms. Other than that and price and magic item tweaks, the list is pretty much fine as is. No need for wholesale changes.

Kisanis
13-10-2010, 19:46
Knights on foot (for sieges) and the trebuchet reduced to s4. Shields optional on men at arms. Other than that and price and magic item tweaks, the list is pretty much fine as is. No need for wholesale changes.

As far as the knights on foot, I was leaning that way for the regiment wide virtue.

Personally I like the treb as is... although a larger model I think would be fair (And a better centrepiece)

I enjoy parts of the list, but I feel that it's starting to get Dark Eldar syndrome in that theres only really one or two ways to competitively put together the army.

Peril
13-10-2010, 20:11
The only thing they REALLY need is a more reliable way to make the charge.

aka_mythos
13-10-2010, 20:19
Bretonnia doesn't have many options as it is, weakening the trebuchet is just one more blow to the limited versitility of the army. If you wanted to mess around with the trebuchet, I'd recommend different ammunitions for it throw, you trade power for versatility in a meaningful way.

Bretonnia needs foot soldiers. Mounted Knights are their thing but there has to be some variations to allow more depth and variaty. Whether its foot slogging Errant/Realm/Questing/Grail Knights or something all together new. I'm a fan of bringing ground pounding knights into the army, but that wouldn't be as necessary if Men-at-arms or Archers were more capable. Why are, men-at-arms, the trained soldiers of Bretonnia only about as capable as mustered empire militia? In the very least there should be the option of improving a single unit of them to some sort of more elite home guard. Similarly archers could have the option of accentuating the skirmisher/forester/Robin-hood aspects better.

I think the idea of shared virtues are a good mechanism for allowing more flavor for knights. It also keeps simple how to represent foot knights, thought I don't know if GW would want to produce models for a unit that strictly speaking exists only as an upgrade.

Bretonnia needs a minimum of one more special and one more rare choice, to actually present meaningful choices, instead of the trade offs of how many realm knights you choose to field.


The only thing they REALLY need is a more reliable way to make the charge.
At this point Bretonnia, and every army really, should be more than a one trick pony. Its great that we get that unique ability, but many other armies have unique abilities but also get so much more.

Not a word to the elf.
13-10-2010, 20:56
Brettonia needs two things;

1. more war machines.

2. since brettonians are fantasy's space marines they need shoulder pads that give +1 to thier armor save

Gooner
13-10-2010, 21:04
I totaly agree that there should be a foot knight unit. Although it doesnt really fit into ALL of their fluff it would still be a usefull addition to the army.

I dont really agree with the men at arms being any better, I like the idea that they are strong and cheap. Plus they are awsome models.

I think pegasus knights should somehow become usefull.

I also agree that trbuchets should be able to say launch a large weak template aka bunch of rubble or a small strong template aka 1 large rock.

I jhave found that playing against brets is very fun and their knights hit really damn hard. I also feel that lore of life and beast are great for brets so they dont really need a magic lore for themselves.

I think that the biggest issue being needed to adress the price of units, like making knights errents wurth their points and alowing enough space for knights and men at arms in large formations.

Ludaman
13-10-2010, 21:06
Here's how I see an 8th edition Bretonnian book seperating itself from empire while still keeping it's fluff:

1. Better characters: while Bretonnians have marginally better characters now than empire, their fluff has always made the knightly lords out to be the best human warriors in the world. Possible imporvements: Virtues are in addition to magic item points, the blessing becomes 5+ against all attacks for Grail Knight characters, Grail knight characters receive +1 weaponskill, +1 initiative, +1 attack. Better virtues to replace the ones that are now obsolete.

2. Questing knights on foot as a special choice: WS 4, Str 6, 5+AS foot-troops would go a long way to giving the Brets a much needed boost. It would also work out fine with the current fluff. Questing knights give up all worldy possesions to quest for the grail. If one loses his horse he may not be able to purchase another. 11-12pts per model?

3. Remove unit limits for all knights: One of the biggest things hindering Brets right now is that you can only take a max of 15/12 knights in a unit, preventing them from benefiting from horde rules as well as making it difficult to take enough ranks in the lance to eliminate steafast from your opponent's units. Perhaps go back to the old lance formation shape with new rules? I really thought the wedges looked great on the table and if you allowed all knights in the unit to attack on the charge and then forced them to rank up in ranks of at least 5 if they didn't break the enemy unit, it would be pretty neat!

4. Ballistas! Give the Brets the primitive war machines that the empire no longer uses. Bolt throwers and catapults vs. canons and mortars. (also flaming ammmunition on war machines the same as the bowmen get).

5. Add all of this and I think Brets still wont be on the same level as demons/skaven/etc, but it sure would add a bit of diversity from how they're played now.

Oh! I'd also really, really, really, really, like to see a new version of repanse de lioness. Modeled with long hair blowing in the wind along with a banner blowing in the same direction!

Kevlar
14-10-2010, 01:44
Brettonia needs two things;

1. more war machines.

2. since brettonians are fantasy's space marines they need shoulder pads that give +1 to thier armor save

Well then why do empire get terminator (inner circle) knights?

aka_mythos
14-10-2010, 01:55
@Lundaman I think you really got some of the finer distinctions... now my more thorough response...


Here's how I see an 8th edition Bretonnian book seperating itself from empire while still keeping it's fluff:

1. Better characters: while Bretonnians have marginally better characters now than empire, their fluff has always made the knightly lords out to be the best human warriors in the world. Possible imporvements: Virtues are in addition to magic item points, the blessing becomes 5+ against all attacks for Grail Knight characters, Grail knight characters receive +1 weaponskill, +1 initiative, +1 attack. Better virtues to replace the ones that are now obsolete.
...
Oh! I'd also really, really, really, really, like to see a new version of repanse de lioness. Modeled with long hair blowing in the wind along with a banner blowing in the same direction! I lumped these together cause I think they kinda go hand in hand. One aspect of Bretonnia's diminished characters I think came with the reduction in the number of special characters. We've lost a good number of special characters that would go a long way towards helping distinguish Bretonnia, in ways that generic Lords and heroes might not.

In addition to Repanse deLioness, who I agree should have the more romanticized image, we lost Baron Odo and Suliman le Saracen, Bertrand le Brigand, Duc Bohemond, and Tristan le Troubador and Jules le Jongleur. Each of which could put a spin on a particular flavor of Bretonnian.

I think allowing some of these special characters and generic characters to carry certain themes into units go a long way to show how the virtuous heros of Bretonnia can inspire the acts of bravery that make Bretonnia so capable. This would directly contrast them from the empire, which is about volume and not inspiring virtue.



2. Questing knights on foot as a special choice: WS 4, Str 6, 5+AS foot-troops would go a long way to giving the Brets a much needed boost. It would also work out fine with the current fluff. Questing knights give up all worldy possesions to quest for the grail. If one loses his horse he may not be able to purchase another. 11-12pts per model?
That's a very good way to handle it fluffwise. It also helps since by making them Questing knights it doesn't require any stretch of imagination to figure out what they're armed with or their rules... I think they go just far enough to distinguish themselves from Empire Greatswords as well.



3. ... Agreed; I don't think any other army book still has this type of restriction.



4. Ballistas! Give the Brets the primitive war machines that the empire no longer uses. Bolt throwers and catapults vs. canons and mortars. (also flaming ammmunition on war machines the same as the bowmen get).
I'm not entirely a fan of putting Ballistas in... but why not. In general if we want to parallel the cannon and mortar dichotomy I think having Trebuchet and Onager makes more sense... they could be a single kit with minor yet significant differences in assembly. Much like the cannon and mortar, the Trebuchet and Onager were used in the same period together. In addition to the mechanical and construction differences, they varied in their projectiles trajectory, much like Cannon and mortars do. Thus in both instances you have variation on a single technology applied in two distinct ways.

A ballista is appropriate to the period Bretonnians are derived, but I feel its already a bit overused by other armies to a large enough degree you couldn't put a Bretonnian slant to it.



5. Add all of this and I think Brets still wont be on the same level as demons/skaven/etc, but it sure would add a bit of diversity from how they're played now. I think with these changes and additions Bretonnia will still be weak to all the things it currently is, but it goes a long way to making many of them manageable.

The only thing that is needed is some means of handling magic... possibly something in the rare category that can better counter act the more devastating magic.

Grovel
14-10-2010, 03:59
Brettonia needs two things;

1. more war machines.

2. since brettonians are fantasy's space marines they need shoulder pads that give +1 to thier armor save

I'm more than a little bit confused as to why you think more war machines makes sense, or how you made the comparison between Bret's and Marines... Both seem a mile off to me.

Trains_Get_Robbed
14-10-2010, 04:36
Nah, the Questing knights would essentially underpriced White Lions. :/

I suggest a +3 A.S foot knights that have maces/big swords that give +1 S in the first round of combat. They would be S4 and WS5 with shields have unbreakable and have a Ward Save based on praying. 11 points a mode, I 5.

Charistoph
14-10-2010, 04:59
Questing Knights should be assigned a quest when they're deployed, which gives them a bonus vs what they're questing against, depending on what they're fighting.

Grail Knights could possibly use a boost in T and/or I, and maybe be able to take unit-wide Virtues would be nice.

War Machines should be kept to a minimum, and in Rare.

A Knight unit that would be monstrous in combat would be nice, too, or maybe a lighter version of the Green Knight.

Trains_Get_Robbed
14-10-2010, 05:04
^^^^ Grail Knights should be the best Knights in the game period. They should be like Blood Knights. Essentially on steroids. S7 on the charge, ethereal, and a random virtue given before the game: ASF, a higher ward, +1 W.S and +1 I, +1 A etc. . . If their supposed to be heavenly. Then they need to portray it.

Psygon
14-10-2010, 05:42
I'm not entirely a fan of putting Ballistas in... but why not. In general if we want to parallel the cannon and mortar dichotomy I think having Trebuchet and Onager makes more sense... they could be a single kit with minor yet significant differences in assembly. Much like the cannon and mortar, the Trebuchet and Onager were used in the same period together. In addition to the mechanical and construction differences, they varied in their projectiles trajectory, much like Cannon and mortars do. Thus in both instances you have variation on a single technology applied in two distinct ways.

A ballista is appropriate to the period Bretonnians are derived, but I feel its already a bit overused by other armies to a large enough degree you couldn't put a Bretonnian slant to it.


Think big.
Big as in the trebuchet compared to other stone throwers.
Big as in a really gigantic "crossbow" that would put other bolt throwers to shame and make them go cry for their mommy.

Rule-wise, I have no idea. Just make it a really large, immovable ballista.

A Bretonnian slant would be... *drum roll* flaming ammunition!

Ludaman
14-10-2010, 05:42
Nah, the Questing knights would essentially underpriced White Lions. :/

I suggest a +3 A.S foot knights that have maces/big swords that give +1 S in the first round of combat. They would be S4 and WS5 with shields have unbreakable and have a Ward Save based on praying. 11 points a mode, I 5.

?Really? In that sense Greatswords are also underpriced white Lions. About the only thing in common is the str 4 + a great weapon... kinda like graveguard... or chaos warriors... White lions have ASF which is incredible, higher WS and Initiative as well as a better save against shooting not to mention stuborn. I think 11 or 12 points would be just about perfect. Perhaps upgrade the questing virtue to immune to psycology and the grail virtue to stuborn since both rules have lost a lot of their value with the addition of steadfast + battle standards. Plus how cool would a unit of knights on foot armed with greatweapons look? Just look what Ender has done with his legion of the black grail wraiths in his painting blog. Anyway I just hope Brets get a little love before 2013

soots
14-10-2010, 08:08
Id like to see the ability to break steadfast easily (maybe on the turn they charge only?), or the ability to do hit and run.

Its not the greatest thing seeing your army renown for penetrating the toughest armies hit anything with T3 as if it was a brickwall.

Trains_Get_Robbed
14-10-2010, 08:21
Yes Ludamen, because I want to pay 12 points for a model that won't survive past one round and would be better overall as the model currently is: on a horse. Gets a +3 and 12 in' more M and takes less of them to break ranks. . . . I'm pretty sure a foot-knight that does what was suggested above has no place in a Bret army, I would much rather spend an extra ten points for the following above.

No, they need to have some sort of brutal T and S knight foot unit and insane Grail Knights as well as Dragoons and perhaps other warmachines and perhaps monsters (dragons chimeras? They slay them often, why can't they ride them again?) Throw Robin Hood SP. and routine and also perhaps a "waywatcheresqe) troops. As well as new units.

Commissar Vaughn
14-10-2010, 08:22
Id much prefer Bretonnians to return to their Romantasized France/King Arthur/Robin Hood path. But I can't see it happening.

1) Give Men At Arms a more fitting profile.
2)Ditch Grail Pilgrims in favour of both Foot Knights and Peasant Levies.
3)Pot du Feu!
4)Ditch the lance formation: Better not to have it at all if its going to look that silly, and with the current supporting attacks rule it doenst do anything anyway: Replace it with Devesating Charge and/or First Charge (Auto Break rule from WAB).

Ivellis
14-10-2010, 09:00
More than anything I want larger differences between, KotR, Errant Knight, Questing Knights and Grail Knights.

I'm not quite certain how. For GK make them the equal of Blood Knights and Chaos Knights at least.

Artinam
14-10-2010, 09:21
- For me it seems better either to completely rework the army (semi-start from scratch as they did going from 3th to 5th edition Bretonnia). A fresh start with a completely new way to play the army.

Or.

- Fine tune the current army, have Virtues in addition to magic item allotment, add a few new units (FootKnights, Peasant Levy, improve Men-at-Arms, add a few fancy rules to the Questing and Grail Knights to distinguish them more.

I don't want a half half approach where the army isn't completely commited to the new play style and where it completely breaks down.

Delicious Ron
14-10-2010, 11:27
I dont play Brettonia, but I would be tempted if the army had more varied and capable infantry.

Shizzbam
14-10-2010, 11:35
I see alot of talk about putting Knights on foot or creating an all new infantry unit, but what about the Grail Pilgrims and Reliquae?

What if they were simply buffed and reworked a bit till they were a Grail Knight's personal guard, or perhaps even peasants who have decided to retrace the grail quest of a particular knight and in doing so have become somewhat elite fighters themselves?

That way a new unit does not need to be created, no knight has to work around on foot (the shame!) and Bretonnia gets it's elite infantry.

dragonet111
14-10-2010, 11:55
I like the current state of the army but some suggestion here a really good. Questing knight on foot, yes love the idea.
Make the Grail Knights on part with Chaos Knights since they are supposed to be one of the best cavalry unit in the world and infuse with the power of a Goddess

Bretonnia is blocked in time compared to the Empire, I don't want a modern Bretonnia but a more magic/mystic Bretonnia. Something to justify a strong nation even if their technology is completely out dated.

Snake1311
14-10-2010, 12:44
Bretonnia in practice is actually pretty effective at what its supposed to do. They just need a little more variety. And I disagree about peg knights being useless - they're still veyr manouverable, and with stomp they hit like a ****. Neither should brets get a lot of heavy infantry - doesn't fit their fluff much.

So, Fixes:

Lords & Heroes:

- Virtues separate from Magic Item allowance
- Add a 'priest' version of damsels - giving minor autocast buffs, ala cauldron of blood

Core

- Maybe give kinght champs a small magic item allowance
- There is no need to buff M@A. They are supposed to be crappy because they aren't the typical 'type' of unit for the army. Also, they aren't actually that bad

Rare

- Trebuchet to S4. Atm this is probably the best warmachine for its cost in the game - in an army that supposed to abhor them. Taking two in every comp list is a no-brainer now, and they're supposed to be that not-typical-for-the-army, few-people-pick-it choice.

- Buff Grails so they're awesome - accompanied by a fair point increase depending on the buff. Quite a lot of options on how to do this.

- Questing knights on foot. Yes, in the rare, and yes, should be fairly expensive - basically, shouldn't have players take more than 1 per army, and shound't be too big in numbers.

Rolf
14-10-2010, 13:57
I think the bretonians need most are new character models, done in the same vane as the empire ones.

Rules wise, bring back some of the old special characters, they added a lot of colour to the old book.

As for troops reduce the cost of all the knights but especialy realm and errants. Also men at arms having a +1ws upgrade if you take a lord. Questing knights also having the option to be mounted or not.

Commissar Vaughn
14-10-2010, 13:57
I dont agree with adding more "fancy rules". WHFB already has a million of these. Cant we just cut a few out?

Woodsman
14-10-2010, 14:24
Get rid of the Treb.

Re-cost the Knights, a little something to differentiate each different type. No max unit strength.

Make GK hard again, really hard. Keep the infantry crap. Bring back the old SC's especially Bertrand and the barrel of wine.

If you like infantry there are 14 other armies to choose from:p

Make them more hero centric again, perhaps make champions more powerful - along the lines of Eldar exarches.

bluemage
14-10-2010, 14:43
I feel the problem with brets is a lot of variety in units and characters. Bring on 15+ special characters unique, characterful gimmiks.

But really the important thing is to add a couple more units. Questing knights on foot would be great. Maybe give them some options for gear, either GW, halberd, or mace + shield.

Maybe add another warmachine, a type of bolt thrower, like some have mentions is a great idea.

I feel like they could use another couple of units, but I really can't think of anything else.

aka_mythos
14-10-2010, 14:49
Bretonnia is blocked in time compared to the Empire, I don't want a modern Bretonnia but a more magic/mystic Bretonnia. Something to justify a strong nation even if their technology is completely out dated. This goes to what I've said in the past about the distinguishing Bretonnia and the Empire. GW could have spun it many ways, but they kinda failed by giving the Empire everything and the kitchen sink. They could have drawn distinctions in different ways... secular versus religious, magic versus faith, or magic versus technology. Instead they made the empire a hyper-religious, magical, and techno-savy state. Leaving Bretonnia with less religion, less magic, and less technology. Bretonnia is a back water.

The only contrast was really that Empire draws from rennaisance inspiration while Bretonnia is inspired by the romanticized views of the medieval period. GW trashed that distinction when they made it less about the mystic romanticism of that period and more about the darkages. Less about an ignorant bliss and true virtue and more about opression and tyranny of lords. That quality is really the only thing GW can draw from that doesn't tread on the Empire.

I think the galantry of the Knights should be reinvigerated. As it is, they are predominantly used as faceless core troops, when they should be portaryed as heroic self sacrificing individuals. Where the fact that some one is so virtuous "inspires" the unit he is part of. Conveying the effects of some virtues from characters onto units is an easy enough way to convey that. Which virtues can be conveyed to which type of knights adds to their distinction.


Get rid of the Treb. I think it should be kept. In the metagame, its just essential that such a choice exists. If you don't like it you don't have to take it.


I feel the problem with brets is a lot of variety in units and characters. Bring on 15+ special characters unique, characterful gimmiks.

But really the important thing is to add a couple more units. Questing knights on foot would be great. Maybe give them some options for gear, either GW, halberd, or mace + shield.

If characters are a defining aspect of Bretonnians over the Empire, then we certainly should have more of the most virtuous characters from Bretonnia's history.

When it comes to Questing Knights on foot, I think they should be equipped the same just without the horse. Aside from the consistency having someone with both great weapon, hand weapon, and shield it also makes them a more unique infantry choice; less distinctively but in the same vein as Elven Sea Guard.

Ivellis
14-10-2010, 15:06
A few ways to differentiate Bretonnia and the Empire:
-Focus Brets on characters and heroes.
-Bring back the chivalry.
-Give them a closer relationship with their goddess than any other army but Chaos, giving them all kinds of boons, not just a situational ward save.
-Make their people less ignorant than the Empire, they know what's out there because their leaders publicly hunt the monsters that live under your bed.
-Perhaps since they are hunters of evil they have more information about such things than the Empire? Details about Chaos, Orcs, Beastmen and Skaven that the Empire doesn't have.
-Domesticated a variety of animals other civilizations have not.

bluemage
14-10-2010, 15:09
When it comes to Questing Knights on foot, I think they should be equipped the same just without the horse. Aside from the consistency having someone with both great weapon, hand weapon, and shield it also makes them a more unique infantry choice; less distinctively but in the same vein as Elven Sea Guard.

The mace and shield combo, is really more about the fact that no armyies seem to use maces. I understand the Orc choppa really is just a mace which allows the parry save. But the combo works for brets, because Questing knights will already have a ward save thanks to the lady. Also I like armor saves and 4+ > then 5+.

Donnie Darko
14-10-2010, 15:16
I think knights on foot (while historically accurate) would be terrible given the Bretonnian lore.

I would like to see one unit of M@A be upgradable to house guards (maybe +1 WS, +1 I and option for HA).

I would also love to see the return of pikes. I know GW loves their spears, but given the horde nature of M@A's and how crap LA/Shield is now I'd happily take the extra fighting ranks.

Also, given the rules for having to fight with a specialized weapon if you have it, they should start M@A's naked and let you chose to move up from LA+HW.

Making squires somewhat useful again would also be nice but I don't really see how.

The knight units could use some tweaking, but aren't bad over all.
No new war machines of missile troops. Just not Bretonnia's thing.

One area that I think has a lot of potential is improving the way the Blessing affects characters and units that do great deeds/are faithful. The ward save is a great start, but I'd like to see units be able to build and use faith points (like SOB) if they win a challenge, or break/wipe out a unit with higher WS- that sort of thing.

It would make the army (and it's knights) very distinct without changing or modifying the lore.
You could almost pull the rewards directly from the SOB book too without unbalancing anything.

This would also make Grail Knights the bees knees again, without taking away their humanity. Any unit w/ the Virtue of the Grail would start with one Faith point, others would have to earn them.

Acts of Faith
Lady's Wrath:
Each model get's +2 St but strikes at I 1

Guiding Hand:
May re-roll failed to hit rolls that turn.

Divine Fervor:
Knight(s) gain ASF special that turn, may not be combined with Lady's wrath.

Lady's Radiance:
Knight (and the unit he is with) becomes fearless that turn (immune to psychology and unbreakable).

Shield of Faith:
For the remainder of the turn, the effect of the Blessing makes the Knight's armour save a ward save instead of granting the 6++/5++.

These could be further limited such that every model in the unit must still have the Lady's blessing for anyone to use an act of faith. (No filthy peasants getting the boost). I'd also like to change the way the prayer icon works, so that the unit would have to have the blessing at the beginning of the game to 'regain' it.

Bretonnian combat characters would get a nice boost (for at least one turn) without unduly changing their stats etc.

Vashta
14-10-2010, 15:39
Bring the Pot au Feu back!

Paint it Red
14-10-2010, 15:55
The problem with the book at the moment is the lack of varity. For an army that is meant to be about fantastical knights, the armylist does a poor job. In my opinion the Dark elves and high elves books are alot better at being a fantasy knight army. The next Bretonnia book should take back this ground as being the archetype knight based fantasy army with a variety of different foot units to support the knights. Here are some changes that I would like.

1. Green knight as a rare choice
2. Grail knight hippogryh rider. Would be monsterous cavalry and a single model.
3. Squires. Would be a yeoman on foot with longbow and the scout special rule.
5. Grail fanatics, WS2 and Ld 5, 2pts each, hatred, only armed with hand weapon, option for flail for +1 pt/model or shield +1 pt. Can be given a grail reliquae (makes the unit unbreakable).
6. Hunting dogs
7. Bilmen. A knight of realm unit on foot with halberd, heavy armour, 7 pts
8. Men-at-arms changed to Spearmen. WS3, Ld 7, light armour, 5 pts, option for shield for 1 pt/model
9. All knight units except knight errant are stubborn.
10. Non-knight units do not cause panic to knights.

If there is a Bretonnian lore I do not want it to be the only lore that damsels can have. IMO lore of life is the perfect both rules wise and fluff. Talking of fluff, in the new book I want to know what happens to the boys when the Fey takes them, do they become grail knights, frogs, etc?

Paint it Red
14-10-2010, 15:59
Ha, just realised they already have "Non-knight units do not cause panic to knights"

McBaine
14-10-2010, 16:38
Bring the Pot au Feu back!
Please, Lady, no! The Pot de Feu died a long time ago and it should stay that way.

I can see that crossbowmen and Ballistas would have a slight chance of making it (as rare choices), but every variation of a gunpowder weapon is just plain wrong. While Balistas and crossbows would not fit the fluff, they would at least fit the state of technology.

I will wait for the first 8th edition book (Orcs & Goblins ?) hit the shelves and then see what it brings. I'd like to check it for the teasers in the BRB. (If you don't know what I'm talking about: In the Fluff section of the BRB every army seems to have some sort of teasers... units that are described, but are not part of the army list (yet?)).
So, if the new Orc and Goblin book has "large arachnoid terrors, the size of empire town houses", "mammoth cave beasts" and "wooden effigies of the orc gods coming to life", then I will get my hopes up for Bretonnian Hippogryphen riders in formation and fey spirits from the land - "ghostly bowmen, the souls of long-lost knights, and even the transluctent spirits of the land itself".

aka_mythos
14-10-2010, 17:52
The mace and shield combo, is really more about the fact that no armyies seem to use maces. I understand the Orc choppa really is just a mace which allows the parry save. But the combo works for brets, because Questing knights will already have a ward save thanks to the lady. Also I like armor saves and 4+ > then 5+. Well, I think unless some other option is given to questing knights, questing knights on foot shouldn't be changed up to have a different set of options. Maybe its a prime idea to give mounted Questing Knights other options, but it should be made to both forms.


I think knights on foot (while historically accurate) would be terrible given the Bretonnian lore. The simple fact is, the army needs some form of more capable infantry. Fluffwise its never been addressed how Bretonnians siege an enemy castle, but they would obviously couldn't ride their horses up onto enemy walls or rely solely on their men-at-arms.

I think the creative notion of a "Special" unit of Questing Knights who have lost their horses in battle and without worldly possessions cannot afford replacement is fitting.

Peril
14-10-2010, 18:15
I like the Questing Knights as a special choice infantry. Give them the same option as the Sword of the Quest magic item - they can wield their bastard swords as a 1H or 2H weapon as desired each combat. Give them shields and now you have a dynamic and interesting infantry option.

Vazalaar
14-10-2010, 19:16
- Give KotR, QK and GK as a champion upgrade the ability to have instead of the champion the ability to upgrade the champion to a paladin (hero) with all options available, which doesn't count to the Lord and Hero allowance. But they can't leave their unit and if they die the unit should get a nasty effect.

- I would love to have Questing Knights on foot even if it's only for the beautiful plastic set they could make.

- No Warmachines

- No monsters.

- Bretonnia should be about lots of KotR, some QK and the rare Grail knight with loads of weak infantry (except the QK on foot;-))

- Or make Grail Knights units that can only exist out 1 Grail Knight per unit, unbreakable, magical attacks, D6+1 attack, S5, 2+ AS, 5+ WS and I6 + ASF and terror ;-)

defunct
14-10-2010, 20:00
I want my Questing Knights to remain mounted!
If people want them on foot there should be an option for that instead, not do away with mounted QK completely!

Or if someone wants better infantry it could be a unit of men at arm/yeoman wardens or sergeants or whatever.

In fact NOTHING should be replaced, only units added.

Zaonite
14-10-2010, 20:15
I want my Questing Knights to remain mounted!
If people want them on foot there should be an option for that instead, not do away with mounted QK completely!

Or if someone wants better infantry it could be a unit of men at arm/yeoman wardens or sergeants or whatever.

In fact NOTHING should be replaced, only units added.

I hear you dude.

Ludaman
14-10-2010, 20:25
I don't think any of us suggested taking out questing knights on horses, just the option of adding them on foot =)

defunct
14-10-2010, 20:40
Apologies, just so concerned it might actually happen. =(

It's such a badass unit now in my opinion and the models are among my top favorites.

When I also saw a post about ditching grail pilgrims too, I just had to make that post! :D

Botjer
14-10-2010, 21:09
Knights of the realm on foot, not anything fancy or special just ordinary knights on foot, thatd rock

Necromancer2
14-10-2010, 21:11
I actually hope they don't add knights on foot. Just make M@A more capable.

Malorian
14-10-2010, 21:18
What do you guys think about allowing units to pay more points to upgrade the unit champ to a grail knight?

Botjer
14-10-2010, 21:32
1 unit of knights of the realm on foot for every two men at arms units

Psygon
14-10-2010, 22:19
What do you guys think about allowing units to pay more points to upgrade the unit champ to a grail knight?

This may be lazy of me, but I would rather have a very powerful unit of grail knights rather them being unit champs. I understand the reasoning behind it, but I find the profile could get messy in combat.

Then again, it depends how much it would cost, how powerful they would be, and whether or not they would bring anything other than raw combat ability.

If you took a GK as a champ and it allowed you to add a virtue to the knight unit, then I might buy one every list I make, just as long as the virtues are worth it/actually useful. Adding to KOTR leadership would be useful, too.

You'd think Bret Lords would be LD 10, being fearless in the face of danger as well as virtuous and noble.

Leogun_91
14-10-2010, 22:36
I don't play them (though I have considered them) but will give my opinions just because I have nothing better to do.

Lords and heroes (and their mounts)
*Hippogryphs are supposed to be monstrous beasts tamed because they are lethal to tame. A knight proves how good he is by taming such an extremely ferocious beast, Griffons are far from that but still both are almost the same (the griffin has slightly better stats), give the hippogryph frenzy to show how dangerous and hard to control it is.
* Add a peasant hero, a chosen yeoman such as a wallwarden or similar. This hero shouldn't have good stats and shouldn't be allowed to join knight units. It will however boost a peasant unit in battle a little.
* Add a seacreature as a mount, Languille heraldry features them.

Core
* Remove 1+ from Knights of the Realm. The rule is fluffy but limiting.
* Give Villein +1Ld.

Special
* Remove 0-1 from relique and give them WS3.
* Allow units of non-mounted Yeomen and boost both types of yeomen in WS or I.

Rare
*Add a Hermit knight. Single model on foot, Lordstats, unbreakable, sword and shield, always have the blessing regardless if the Bretonnian player prayed.
*Grailknights buffed greatly, Devastating charge, Regeneration, +1WS, Magic resistance 2 or 3, may ride pegasi.
*Field Trebuchet modified.

Zaonite
14-10-2010, 22:41
What do you guys think about allowing units to pay more points to upgrade the unit champ to a grail knight?

Adding extra leadership and tiny amount of combat ability to a normal knight unit would be awesome. They should grant the unit something extra though. Like Psygon said - maybe a virtue or unlocking magic banners for the unit.

Although the Grail Knight unit should be kept too. I'd like to see a boost for them. +1 T maybe, or 5+ ward against all attacks. (preferably both)

Also I agree that Lords should be Ld 10.

Skjoldr
14-10-2010, 22:57
Just some things i'd like to see.

Men-At-Arms:
As now, option to have a Knight of the Realm as champion. Makes the unit stubborn on LD8. If the Knight dies, the unit must immediately take a panic test.

Yeomen:
Mounted as now, in addition should have a foot unit. 7ish points a model, WS3, has choice between halberd, spear/shield, hw/shield or great weapon. Heavy armor. Peasant units within 6" can use their leadership, LD7.

Grail Knights:
+1 WS, I and T.
Devastating Charge
Killing Blow

Characters:
Vows in addition to magic items
Knight's Vow - Immune to Psychology
Questing Vow - Stubborn, Immune to Psychology
Grail Vow - Magical attacks, +1 A, Immune to Psychology, Stubborn, gives a single bound spell chosen during list creation

Knights of the Realm:
May take a unit vow up to 25 points, new rule, "Hold the Line!" Once per game a unit of Peasants within 6" may re-roll any LD tests until the end of the player turn, 25 point banner allowance

Questing Knights:
Unit vow up to 50 points, champ gets 25 point magic item allowance, 50 point banner allowance, Stubborn

Woodsman
14-10-2010, 23:03
I think knights on foot (while historically accurate) would be terrible given the Bretonnian lore.

One area that I think has a lot of potential is improving the way the Blessing affects characters and units that do great deeds/are faithful. The ward save is a great start, but I'd like to see units be able to build and use faith points (like SOB) if they win a challenge, or break/wipe out a unit with higher WS- that sort of thing.

It would make the army (and it's knights) very distinct without changing or modifying the lore.
You could almost pull the rewards directly from the SOB book too without unbalancing anything.

This would also make Grail Knights the bees knees again, without taking away their humanity. Any unit w/ the Virtue of the Grail would start with one Faith point, others would have to earn them.

Acts of Faith
Lady's Wrath:
Each model get's +2 St but strikes at I 1

Guiding Hand:
May re-roll failed to hit rolls that turn.

Divine Fervor:
Knight(s) gain ASF special that turn, may not be combined with Lady's wrath.

Lady's Radiance:
Knight (and the unit he is with) becomes fearless that turn (immune to psychology and unbreakable).

Shield of Faith:
For the remainder of the turn, the effect of the Blessing makes the Knight's armour save a ward save instead of granting the 6++/5++.

These could be further limited such that every model in the unit must still have the Lady's blessing for anyone to use an act of faith. (No filthy peasants getting the boost). I'd also like to change the way the prayer icon works, so that the unit would have to have the blessing at the beginning of the game to 'regain' it.

Bretonnian combat characters would get a nice boost (for at least one turn) without unduly changing their stats etc.

This and this. footknights -spot on. I really like that idea for the blessing, not sure if that's how it should work, but its interesting!


- Give KotR, QK and GK as a champion upgrade the ability to have instead of the champion the ability to upgrade the champion to a paladin (hero) with all options available, which doesn't count to the Lord and Hero allowance. But they can't leave their unit and if they die the unit should get a nasty effect.

- I would love to have Questing Knights on foot even if it's only for the beautiful plastic set they could make.

- No Warmachines

- No monsters.

- Bretonnia should be about lots of KotR, some QK and the rare Grail knight with loads of weak infantry (except the QK on foot;-))

- Or make Grail Knights units that can only exist out 1 Grail Knight per unit, unbreakable, magical attacks, D6+1 attack, S5, 2+ AS, 5+ WS and I6 + ASF and terror ;-)

QFT There's plenty of other armies that can do infantry, monsters and war machines.



The simple fact is, the army needs some form of more capable infantry. Fluffwise its never been addressed how Bretonnians siege an enemy castle, but they would obviously couldn't ride their horses up onto enemy walls or rely solely on their men-at-arms.

I think the creative notion of a "Special" unit of Questing Knights who have lost their horses in battle and without worldly possessions cannot afford replacement is fitting.

The thing is as a knight, walking around on your quest is bad enough, walking around in a bloody heavy suit of armour and carrying a massive sword is a recipe for quest failure. :)

I fail to see why men at arms couldn't enact a seige.

Charistoph
14-10-2010, 23:20
Why can't foot knights be Errants? They are new, haven't earned their own horse yet, maybe even haven't officially earned their spurs (what's the name for a knight-in-training?).

Makes more sense than an experienced knight losing his steed.

aka_mythos
15-10-2010, 02:13
The thing is as a knight, walking around on your quest is bad enough, walking around in a bloody heavy suit of armour and carrying a massive sword is a recipe for quest failure. :)

I fail to see why men at arms couldn't enact a seige.

Well it happened often enough in real life. During the medieval period Knights didn't always have horse and would walk. In many countries the notion of men-at-arms was exactly that of dismounted knights. They had peasant servants to carry the armor or other beasts of burden.

I could even see them being designated penitent knights, where the shame of being on foot is their penance to the lady for some failure of virtue or honor while on their quest. Historically, that type of penance was handed down to a knight or lord...as an act of humility they had to walk to a shrine or particular holy place. Translate that into this setting and maybe the tyrannic Bretonnian knights might find redemption.

Men-at-arms... siege... are we looking at the same stat line? Maybe if the background described Bretonnia as overly populated with the ability to use attrition tactics. I'm not saying they need to be the best, but they should at least have stats to reflect that unlike peasants they're trained. I think if foot knights are added, we can manage without men-at-arms getting upgraded, but I think its only appropriate that they are.


Why can't foot knights be Errants? They are new, haven't earned their own horse yet, maybe even haven't officially earned their spurs (what's the name for a knight-in-training?). I agree that it make sense, I think the only reason is that from a thematic stand point an infantry unit superior to men-at-arms should be kept out of the core section. That leaves them in either special or rare. Rare seems like they would need something going for them, beyond questing knights and that'd be even harder to justify. As a special choice it keeps foot knights from dominating the army and becoming more common than realm knights, allowing the focus to remain on Bretonnia's mastery of cavalry.

I think the notion of Errant knights on foot could always serve as a driver for a upgrade mechanism for men-at-arms. Where they are either an additional champ of sorts or just outright replace the Warden.

Psygon
15-10-2010, 02:23
Why can't foot knights be Errants? They are new, haven't earned their own horse yet, maybe even haven't officially earned their spurs (what's the name for a knight-in-training?).

Makes more sense than an experienced knight losing his steed.

I believe the term you are looking for is squire. While I have heard they were in past Bretonnia books, it seemed the then Bret squires were actually more peasant-based (Yeomen in this edition), rather than trainee knights.

It appears that (from what I wikipedia'ed) they filled a much more service based role as opposed to a fighting role, but it could work in some sort of a fashion.



And on an off topic note, your quote, is that from the book written by the retired military officer where he talks about how sheep (people) don't typically like the sheep dog (military) until the wolf shows up?

Charistoph
15-10-2010, 06:25
And on an off topic note, your quote, is that from the book written by the retired military officer where he talks about how sheep (people) don't typically like the sheep dog (military) until the wolf shows up?

As I have not read that, no, but if you give me the name, I'm interested.

A Sheep is an animal that will follow the leader, no matter where they go, or what they do. A Wolf preys on Sheep. A Hound protects the Sheep. There's also a Fox and a Snake, but they'd never admit to being one, so asking is pointless.

Basically, I'm directing you to ask yourself if you're a Follower, a Predator, or a Protector. The answer is never to be set in stone, but can change as people develop through life.

I grew up with few friends and spent way too much time thinking.


On Topic: Special Squires could be interesting and fun, just let them keep Impetuous Charge like the Errants.

One other option I'd like to see is for these Foot Knights and Questing Knights to have access to Morning Stars, giving the player an option to play with instead of being forced to use Great Weapons.

McBaine
15-10-2010, 09:32
What about a Grail lord as a seperate lord choice ?
The Duke would be how he is now, has the knights vow and can be upgraded to questing vow.
The Grail Lord would have the grail vow and a better profile (WS7 I7 and LD10 for example)
This could also work on the Hero Level with a grail Paladin.
Also, along those lines giving grail knights LD 9 and some other sort of boost (more benefit through the blessing and/or T4) would be good.

Champions of knighly units (yes, give the grail knights a champion back - dont lose their living legends rule, just give them a champion again) should have access to a small amount of magic items/virtues (lets say 25 points for grail knights, 15 points for the rest)

They need to lose the 0-1 restriction on anything

Let the men at arms have better stats. WS3 and LD 7 is not too much to ask. We can keep a rubbish core peasant unit with WS2 and low morale though. Just rallied peasants in a mob without armour, just their flails or something.

mounted Yeomen and/or skirmishing bowmen as scouts.

Snake1311
15-10-2010, 12:19
[QUOTE=Rolf;5051187]
As for troops reduce the cost of all the knights but especialy realm and errantsQUOTE]

You can't possibly believe that you're paying too much for knights!? Lance formation makes the Bretonnian knightly core awesome, and they are already dirt cheap for their stats.

All the comments regarding buffing Men at Arms are also dissapointing. Taking dirty peasants over knighs should not be incentivised!

Some good ideas about the Grail knights. Please no Kiling Blow though - Brets are meant to kill characters through challenges, not through battering them with a billion attacks and hoping to roll a 6.

I love the faith points idea! Just scrap the current blessing completely, and implement this instead. The points should be in an armywide pool, and each unit can use one to get an automatic augmentation in the magic phase. You should have a few to start with, get a significant chunk more for praying (like start with 2, or 6 if you pray), and then win a point for each challenge won & unit broken in combat.

Darthvegeta800
15-10-2010, 12:40
An ability to field a single Knights on foot. Mildly improved Longbowmen.
Improve the performance and look of man-at-arms. They should be a bit more 'professional'. And designate the fodder as Peasant Levy or militia or something.
Customize the Knights more. Give them virtues or unique artifacts etc.
Perhaps a way to theme the army per province?
The basic Knights should remain the bread and butter of the army, make the Grail Knights a bit more enticing but also very rare.
Expand on the Bretonnian magic and bulk out virtues/items/banners.
A few special heroes on top would be nice.

pippin_nl
15-10-2010, 14:05
I would like to see more virtues (all usable) classified in the following groups; hero, leader, knight and each virtue should have 3 levels (knight, quest, grail)

The hero will fight against all odds and is very good at fighting tough enemies.
The leader inspires his fellowmen to do better and to be brave.
The knight is an expert cavalier and jousting champion who becomes one with his mount.

Heroic generals will have bowmen as special and may not use trebuchets. Virtues do not count against magic item allowance and only one may be taken.

The blessing should grant a 6+ ward save that can be combined with other ward saves.

Knight units must take one minor virtue (5 -15 points per knight). Grail knights receive a bonus virtue for free.

VOWS (cumulative):

The grail vow should grant unbreakable
The questing vow should grant stubborn
The knight's vow should grant immune to panic, fear and terror

Knights of the Realm should have WS3, S3, heavy armour, shield and a lance
Questing Knights should be KOTR with the questing vow and great weapons
Grail Knights should be KOTR with the grail vow.
Errant Knights should be KOTR with frenzy (may not take a virtue)
Pegasus knights should be flying KOTR.

Bowmen and men at arms are good as they are. Grail Pilgrims should stay the same, but the Reliquae should count as a BSB and the unit should be able to take a virtue.

Commissar Vaughn
15-10-2010, 15:07
VOWS (cumulative):

The grail vow should grant unbreakable
The questing vow should grant stubborn
The knight's vow should grant immune to panic, fear and terror




Oh great, just what we need...another army that doesnt use it LD values. :rolleyes:

Why dont we just eliminate LD tests of any sort from the game...nobody uses them anymore and it would save paper....


/sarcasm

Malorian
15-10-2010, 18:01
Oh great, just what we need...another army that doesnt use it LD values. :rolleyes:

Why dont we just eliminate LD tests of any sort from the game...nobody uses them anymore and it would save paper....


/sarcasm

Good point CV. When I first read the idea it seems alright, but you are right that this would just follow an all too common trend.

Ludaman
16-10-2010, 06:18
Yeah I still wouldn't see Grail knights as an unbreakable unit anyway. Unbreakable should be reserved for the mentally deranged or the brain dead. Grail Knights could still see the advantage in a retreat if it meant the chance to better defeat their foe later.

Commissar Vaughn
16-10-2010, 07:33
Well the main reason unbreakable/fearless etc should be left out is that with cavalry, all the brains are in the horse, and if the horse thinks a fight is going badly then it will run, regardless of the opinion of the stupid nutter on its back.

*sits back and waits for someone to suggest magical fearless horses with magical attacks and killing blow...

pippin_nl
16-10-2010, 08:09
Well the main reason unbreakable/fearless etc should be left out is that with cavalry, all the brains are in the horse, and if the horse thinks a fight is going badly then it will run, regardless of the opinion of the stupid nutter on its back.

*sits back and waits for someone to suggest magical fearless horses with magical attacks and killing blow...

Ehm, but they are already immune to psychology, so apparently the knights are in charge according to GW. I do think you make a good point though!

dragonet111
16-10-2010, 12:01
Unbreakable is useless for Bretonnian, being a hero is not being a killing machine like a daemon or a crazy lunatic like an imperial flagellant it is being able to control your fear and still being able to do what you have to do.

I like the vows the way they are now.

Son of Plunder
16-10-2010, 17:27
Crossbowmen, propably! And pilgrims, grail knights, questing knights etc in plastic, and all the other stuff (especially knights) redone!

Makrar
16-10-2010, 21:28
I'd like to see some new units but on the top of my head i cant really think of any, i dont like the idea of units of knights on fights, what are they going to be, greatswords? The idea seems meh at the best. Anyways i would like to somestuff like the following,

A proper lance formation back! pretty please geedub

A small unit of lesser green knights! :D etheral, max blessing, hero stats, expensive, unstable, etc etc (i like the imagery of such a unit)

The knightly vows changed a bit. a unit vow that can be brought for knights, nothing to overpowered but maybe it could tie in with the blessing, you take a vow to kill monsters and you get a better blessing if the units does. Theres plenty to work with here

All Knights have devastating charge. (Ponys need not apply)

MAA : +1 ws, 4 Points each ld 7

Not to sure what to do with errants tbh

Bowmen ld7

Trebs nerfed to str 4 or even 3.

0-1 removed from units

KoTR are int 4 (maybe str4?)

PK Str 4, +1 Save

QK are ws 5 t 4

GK Are Ws6, t4 LD9


4 Point Blessing system, gk start off with 1 point.

1 point for praying at start of game

1 Point = same as now
2 Points = 5+ for all attacks and MR 1
3 Points = +1 Armour save and magical attacks
4 points = 4+ ward for str 5 attacks and mr2

Various knightly things increase favor, unbret things lose it.

Make it fairly hard to get points, dont want games with every knight unit getting to 4 as it would be lame! But needs balancing out really.


Some way of destroying buildings!

Just some idea from the top of my head, only just starting on brets so im probably wide off the mark in what the book actually needs :) and new Kotr box of 5 or so with new GK and moar questing knights (I think they have aged really well) or some kinda of interchangeable set

theJ
16-10-2010, 22:33
Well, I ain't ever played any Brettonians, and I'm still kinda new to WHFB as a whole, but from what I can gather:

*Many people, especially earlier in the thread, seem to consider characters to be an important aspect of the Brettonians. So after thinking long (almost 3minutes) and hard(not really) I came up with an idea: What about making (some) Brettonian champions considerably stronger, a bit like a "mini hero"? They would all have both higher WS, A and Ld, unlike other champions who merely have higher A. They would also all have the option of bringing extra wargear (magical? yes) and a vow. Good/bad?

*Many people want to see knights on foot, many others seem to go into a somewhat khornite rage at the thought. But what about squires? Squires make sense to be fighting on foot, as they have yet to earn a warhorse of their own (at least it was typically like this in real life, not sure what the fluff sais about them). They also make sense to be somewhat better than M@A, since they are, after all, knights in training. Failing this, we could add a CCbased peasant unit and promote the M@A to the proffesional troopers they are supposed to be (to the best of my knowledge).

*People are mentioning a special "damsel lore". I must say I do not agree with this. The damsels are trained by the wood elves, to give them magics that said elves do not have makes no sense. I guess you could have them share the "lore of athel loren" that the elves have, but I'd prefer letting them stay with the main lores. If naught else to keep the focus on the knights, not on the damsels (picturing lvl4 loremaster damsels wielding magical weapons and leading units of knights into the fray -.-)

-Grimgorironhide-
16-10-2010, 23:00
For me personaly I would like a bit of the flavour of 5th ed brought back (not the full status obviously but things like squires, trained MAA, Bertrand, blessing only on shooting ect.)

He're a few changes of mind.

Characters:
-Bring in a squire hero that could mabye make Mounted Yeomen a core choice?
-Make the grail vow for characters more prominent. I.e Itp, +1 Ws, +1 I etc.
-Bring back the old 5th ed SCs

Core:
-Removal of the 1+ for KOTR (just for more variety)
-KOTR champs can take 25pts of magic items.
-Change the current MAA to peasant levy without Light armour or shields. Give them weapon options like two hand weapons, daggers, farm sythes etc.(3pts?)
-MAA same stats as they had in 5th ed.
-Skirmish bowmen no 0-1 limit.

Special:
-Change the fluff on the pilgrims to carring a shrine or something in that regard dedicated to the grail knights, not to loot or handhold its corpse!
-Add in a foot yeoman choice (i.e squires). They are skirmished and can scout.

Rare:
-Grail knights cause fear and mabye T4?
-I like the idea of a Hermit knight.:)

Magic items and virtues: seperate pts allowances.

cheers/

riotknight
16-10-2010, 23:25
O.o Some of these ideas seem...overly complicated.


Seriously? 3 different vows? fine. But then 3 levels for each vow?


Wow...

aka_mythos
17-10-2010, 04:40
I think the 2 most important issues to address to distinguish Bretonnia from the Empire... is the role of infantry and the prevalence of heroes.

In the distant past Bretonnia distinguished itself by allowing upto 75% of its points to be used on heroes. I'm not saying we go back to that, but some thing in that direction, to show that Bretonnia is a land of inspiring heroes and knights that are the stuff of legends.

Second is the role of infantry in the Bretonnian army. They are currently inadequate as they are and they need to get better in some way. There are two approaches, the first is to simply make them more in line with empire soldiers either stat-wise or through other indirect means such as upgrades. The other is to accentuate the expendability of Bretonnian peasants and men-at-arms. In this direction they should become the "gnoblar" of human units, dirt cheap, always in large blocks of models, where by despite empire soldiers being better their are just simply twice as many expendable Bretonnians.

Commissar Vaughn
17-10-2010, 09:44
O.o Some of these ideas seem...overly complicated.


Seriously? 3 different vows? fine. But then 3 levels for each vow?


Wow...

QFT: some people just cant stop when it comes to special rules.

Special rules doesnt not equate to "Cool and Unique" people!

Less is more, chaps.


In the distant past Bretonnia distinguished itself by allowing upto 75% of its points to be used on heroes That wasn't the distant past! Just 3 editions ago! Your making me feel old now....

If you want them to go back to their roots its just a HYW French army.

Knights and Men at Arms (both mounted and on foot)
Spearmen and Billmen.
Crossbowmen and Archers
Hobilars and peasants
some rather rubbish guns....

No virtues, no lance formations, no random and lengthy special rules to try and represent every aspect of Bretonnian lore or character in game terms.

In fact its practically perfect...

pippin_nl
17-10-2010, 10:39
QFT: some people just cant stop when it comes to special rules.

Special rules doesnt not equate to "Cool and Unique" people!

Less is more, chaps.

That wasn't the distant past! Just 3 editions ago! Your making me feel old now....

If you want them to go back to their roots its just a HYW French army.

Knights and Men at Arms (both mounted and on foot)
Spearmen and Billmen.
Crossbowmen and Archers
Hobilars and peasants
some rather rubbish guns....

No virtues, no lance formations, no random and lengthy special rules to try and represent every aspect of Bretonnian lore or character in game terms.

In fact its practically perfect...

Maybe perfect, but certainly no fantasy!

Artinam
17-10-2010, 11:50
Wasn't that third edition Bretonnia?

Commissar Vaughn
17-10-2010, 12:11
Basically.

To be honest, thats as much as I want from an army list these days: Some blokes on horses, some blokes not on horses, and a bloke at the front (possibly on a horse) to give rousing speaches and shout "Charge!" at appropriate moments.

Everything else is just dead weight...

Lord Ekard
17-10-2010, 12:25
it could be interesting with new rules for popolan's units

Ivellis
17-10-2010, 15:33
Vaughn, I'm of the opposite opinion, I want more fantastical in my Bretonnia, not less. Give me magic, give me divine intervention, give me blessed knights so powerful they are nearly inhuman, give me hypogryffs, griffons and hounds, give me heroes and chivalry. I want to feel like my Bretonnian army stepped, rode and flew out of my favorite fantasy epic.

AussieSocks
17-10-2010, 16:28
Hippocampus.

Every knight can challenge. Some kind of Boosted Underdog points. Or Challenge incentives.

Stats boosts for unnamed knights in a challenge with a damsel in his unit. Automatically pass Look out sirs?

Any unit that passes a look out sir or accepts a challenge for the damsel gains +1 to the Ward save for the turn?

All Knights in Challenges, but i don't think it's up there with army wide unbreakable or hatred

Basically, something that makes people go... "oh crap, mustn't hurt the damsel.... Knights will flip their lid".....

Andy p
17-10-2010, 17:25
My own small idea was to do with the Men at Arms. For those who own the current army book, take a look at the picture on the bottom left of the back cover, see that man at arms with his polearm and his shield and how he is holding them? Or even better would be the black and white version under the troops section.

Now my idea would be to give them a rule, in a hypothetical new book, which lets them use their halberds and shields at the same time, due to either training which they recieved, or through the equipment they use, in other words the fact that the shield is strapped to their arm as opposed to being held in a static manner on the models.

Of course I know that in 7th you could choose to use their hand weapons and shields instead of their polarms which meant you could either make them better at wounding or more durable in close combat, but of course as we know 8th removed this. Also I could just count them as having spears instead, but the halberds are usually better in most situations. Another idea would be perhaps for them to update the fluff a little so that the Men at Arms have more to them than just being drafted peasants, such as being trained a little in combat, this would be to the effect of giving them WS3 on the tabletop as opposed to the current WS2.

I understand they are currently meant to be downtrodden and a little monty pythonish, but should they have less skill at hitting things than a goblin?

Glen_Savet
17-10-2010, 17:40
To be fair, you can continue to use their shields in 8th. Just not their hand weapons. Their polearms can be halberds or spears.

Skjoldr
17-10-2010, 18:59
Had an interesting idea for Grail Knights to give them something fluffy, cool and different:

Brilliant Radiance:
Grail Knights are god-like figures of purity and valor, a beacon of humanity's strength against the forces of destruction. To look upon them is to be touched by the Lady's Grace, but for creatures of the darker powers, this same beautiful aura if repulsive, fearsome and painful.

Beastmen, Demons and any model with a Mark of Chaos Fear Grail Knights. In addition, any Undead or Demon unit in combat with Grail Knights will suffer double casualties from crumble or instability at the end of each round of combat.

dragonet111
17-10-2010, 20:44
I like that aura stuff, I would like my Grail Knights and lords/heroes with Grail vow to have it:D

Andy p
17-10-2010, 20:48
To be fair, you can continue to use their shields in 8th. Just not their hand weapons. Their polearms can be halberds or spears.

Really? I thought the halberds required two hands meaning that in close combat you wouldnt get the shields per the new rules?

Afterall I was talking about in close combat, not the protection the shield gives against ranged. Of course if my ideas were to make them too effective, up the points. I also already mentioned spears and that I knew you could use them, but that they werent that good in most situations.

Of course the other side to this is that if, and they probably will eventually, release a new range of miniatures, then they could do them in new poses to represent this, such as the men standing with both hands on the halberds and the shield to the side.

aka_mythos
17-10-2010, 21:09
If you want them to go back to their roots its just a HYW French army.

Knights and Men at Arms (both mounted and on foot)
Spearmen and Billmen.
Crossbowmen and Archers
Hobilars and peasants
some rather rubbish guns....

No virtues, no lance formations, no random and lengthy special rules to try and represent every aspect of Bretonnian lore or character in game terms.


I'm not looking to do that. Not at all. In the realm of extremes it is only a matter of taking a single step back in the direction from which the Bretonnians came and not to go back to the start. I'm simply talking about empowering the more pedestrian units. The option of making them more like empire soldiers through stats, though appealing, lacks distinction. So any improvement to infantry must come through unorthodox means. Formations or a champions aura it doesn't matter it just needs to be distinctive when comparing Bretonnia and Empire.

My example of Archer arrow formations, was only to point out the precedence for an unorthodox solution to the problem at hand.

Glen_Savet
17-10-2010, 23:34
Really? I thought the halberds required two hands meaning that in close combat you wouldnt get the shields per the new rules?

<snip>.

That's correct, halberds require 2 hands. However, if you use them as spears instead, they do not.

Skjoldr
17-10-2010, 23:45
That's correct, halberds require 2 hands. However, if you use them as spears instead, they do not.

Wait....are you saying that in the context of "Their polearms can be used as Halberds OR Spears"? Because that isn't the case, even though it should be. Just not sure how to take what you said. :)

Glen_Savet
17-10-2010, 23:50
I'll have another look at my book when I get off work, but I believe that is what the entry says; they can be used as halberds or spears. I'd use them as spears if I wanted to make use of the shield in combat.

Skjoldr
17-10-2010, 23:55
I'll have another look at my book when I get off work, but I believe that is what the entry says; they can be used as halberds or spears. I'd use them as spears if I wanted to make use of the shield in combat.

They start with Halberds, and can exchange them for Spears. I think we both came across a little odd. lol. But I think their game rules should be Pole-Arms that can be used as Halberds OR Spears chosen at the beginning of combat.

McLucien18
18-10-2010, 16:25
I do actually like the idea of the more elite knights being able to negate steadfast on the turn they charge. It would certainly change the dynamic of the game ( probably a points rise though)

hwd
18-10-2010, 16:59
There are two things I can think that I would like to see changed

1 - Grail Knights. These become units of one knight costing about 150-200 points a piece. Give them a nice big base and some new crazy detailed and dynamic models. Make them not able to break a unit alone but be able to put a serious dent in anything they fight, perhaps with a bonus when fighting monsters, these being monster slaying heroes and all...

2 - Charging bonus - Brets should be able to win out an a protracted combat but have the chance to smash a unit on the charge. Perhaps something simple like when knights charge the enemy cannot benefit from Steadfast meaning a unit of infantry 8 ranks deep isn't going to be ld7-8 (or more) after being slapped about by some charging knights...

Makrar
18-10-2010, 17:37
Perhaps something simple like when knights charge the enemy cannot benefit from Steadfast meaning a unit of infantry 8 ranks deep isn't going to be ld7-8 (or more) after being slapped about by some charging knights...

I think steadfast should remain untouched. Its probably the most important rule change of 8th, giving an army a way around it on the charge would break so much stuff. I even thought about banner of the lady removing 3 ranks from the enemy, but if it did that, how many armies would you see that didnt take it. It would be OP and in 8th id reckon you will see lance formations charging in and staying there quite often, i think the trick is to make the charge deadly enough and make the following round of combats a little better then they are now. and reward you for carefull charging, not just point and click like 7th.

Id like to see a defensive upgrade to the army and to be better on the charge, a full knight bus on the charge should be scary, a full bus of grail knights should be down right brutal :D

kramplarv
18-10-2010, 18:00
Knights could have immense charge bonuses, like ASF or something, combine with a stomp-attack. And after the charge all the knights draw their intimidating morningstars.

or maybe having the charge bonuses even in prolonged combat. (remember we ll like to see the charge as a "going straight into the thick of the enemy ranks") so this rule would represent that the brettonnin charge just wont stop and it will batter down the unit.

I think that would do it. :) And crossbowmen, pavise crossbowmen. wonderful! :D and real men-at-arms. Not a peasant, but a knight-trained warrior. And then add "peasant rabble" as a own unit. :p

Charistoph
18-10-2010, 20:55
What if the Lance Formation allowed them to charge through a unit?

If the charge distance rolled is 6+" greater than needed to complete the charge, then place the charging unit up to 6" past the charged unit. The charged unit receives all attacks as if they were charged as normal, but may only return 1 attack for the depth of the unit charged. If the Lance encounters another unit on the oppositte side of the charged unit, resolve as a normal charge after resolving the combat of the first charged unit.

dragonet111
18-10-2010, 21:07
There are two things I can think that I would like to see changed

1 - Grail Knights. These become units of one knight costing about 150-200 points a piece. Give them a nice big base and some new crazy detailed and dynamic models. Make them not able to break a unit alone but be able to put a serious dent in anything they fight, perhaps with a bonus when fighting monsters, these being monster slaying heroes and all...


I agree on the fact that Grail Knights should be awesome. I would like them on a 50mm base like a Juggernaut with rules to reflect their divine awesomeness.

McBaine
18-10-2010, 23:23
I agree on the fact that Grail Knights should be awesome. I would like them on a 50mm base like a Juggernaut with rules to reflect their divine awesomeness.

Add this, but do not replace the units of grail knights. We have already very few choices... Make a holy knight like you suggested, but keep the "normal" grail knights in units.
No point in further restricting our choices.

Zaonite
19-10-2010, 00:04
What if the Lance Formation allowed them to charge through a unit?

If the charge distance rolled is 6+" greater than needed to complete the charge, then place the charging unit up to 6" past the charged unit. The charged unit receives all attacks as if they were charged as normal, but may only return 1 attack for the depth of the unit charged. If the Lance encounters another unit on the oppositte side of the charged unit, resolve as a normal charge after resolving the combat of the first charged unit.

That would be amazing. But I don't think it'll happen somehow.
And there was me thinking just giving Knights the Devastating Charge special rule was overpowered

Donnie Darko
19-10-2010, 00:49
I'm surprised that there's so much backlash against the Bret list. I understand that this is a wish-listing thread, but almost everything seems to be simply change for changes sake.

If you want excellent infantry, go play any of the infantry lists that already exist in spades. Bretonnia fights from horse back, that's their thing.

Their other thing is that their infantry is pure levy, that means crap. You want professional state soldiers, go play Empire. Every single trained soldier in Bretonnia is of noble birth and therefore a knight, and that means mounted for Brets. For their points, M@A aren't bad at all. The only real change should be that you don't have to buy a halberd/spear, so you can go HW/S for one point less.

So that leaves the question of how to deal with Steadfast... That's the only real issue that Bretonnian armies face right now. MSU doesn't work well anymore, so they need to have a clever way of winning combat round over round. They could just get a nice swordmasters unit of Questing knights, and while you're at it give their archers hand guns and let the army go hang itself in shame.

I still think that adding a SOB like acts-of-faith-mask to the current army is the simplest way to re-enforce their fluff and heal any discrepancies.

You want grail knights to kick ass? Fine spend a couple of your faith points on them in a single turn, now they are St8 A2 with a 2+ ward save for a turn.

Crash your lance into that big bad block of enemy infantry, kill lots on turn one, but they stand? Fine spend a faith point and make your knights either stubborn or +2 strength. Go back to killing everything...

It's one rule that is easy to implement, doesn't unbalance the units as written, and fits the armies background without ruining the core rules (hey High Elves).


Since it was brought up, while I don't personally think the lance needs improving (it's already ridiculously powerful if you're crafty), if you really wanted to represent the knights crashing through a block of infantry and dispersing it, you could have it disrupt ranks:

On the turn the lance charges, each enemy rank may only suffer 3 casualties before models are removed from the next rank. Ranks reduced to less than 5 models in this way do not count for the purpose of rank bonus or stubborn. After every rank has suffered 3 casualties, any remaining wounds may be distributed as the seen fit by the opposing player.

The problem with crap like that though is that it totally contradicts the core rules just to add needless complication and slow the game down.

GW has been exceedingly clear that they want to avoid this at all cost. Unfortunately they then let certain muppets write army books that ruin all the hard work that goes into improving and cleaning up the core rules.

We already track power dice and dispel dice pools, so it's not difficult to have a Faith Pool. We already have spell's that buff units, it's not difficult to have buffs from the Acts of Faith. Bretonnia is entrenched in its ties to the land/lady of the lake/faith so having a god reward its faithful in a fantasy game works, and doesn't break cannon- ie create another generic army with slightly different models.

Charistoph
19-10-2010, 06:48
It's called brainstorming, you start out with something ridiculous or unworkable, and massage things in there. Who knows, it may spark an idea for something to truly work well that actually has nothing to do with the original suggestion.

And yes, I like the "Faith" concept.

Andy p
19-10-2010, 11:58
1 - Grail Knights. These become units of one knight costing about 150-200 points a piece. Give them a nice big base and some new crazy detailed and dynamic models. Make them not able to break a unit alone but be able to put a serious dent in anything they fight, perhaps with a bonus when fighting monsters, these being monster slaying heroes and all...


I really like this idea, afterall, Grail Knights are meant to be pretty rare, plus they could put them on something like a 'blessed steed' which is some big magically infused horse that makes them monstrous cavalry. Of course this might be going too far, but I like your idea.


I understand that this is a wish-listing thread,



So why complain? These are just silly ideas to throw around, I dont mind if none of them get implemented ever, which most probably wont, but that's why it's nice to wish.

uona
19-10-2010, 12:02
hello. Longtime brettonian player here. Most of my suggestions are fluff based altho I only read these brettonian novels knights errant, Knights of the realm, eternal rest (short story), and the previous 2 army books. Oh btw as an aside if anyone can point me to more brettonian novels please do so.

1. Remove grail knights as a unit choice- As you know in novels 9 knights of the realm in a tabletop regiment does not equal 9 knights in the story. It could be as many as 50 or 100 etc. However in a chaos invasion of quellenes (i think) which involved a majority of thier army, and a majority of the army of bastonne, and a few knights from other dukedoms such as parravon etc, there was exactly one grail knight.

Granted the chaos invasion wasnt so big as to draw the attention of the king (who was in a tournament i think) but it consisted of the armies of pretty much 2 whole dukedoms and did draw the attention of the fey enchantress, I mean if anyone knows where to dig up additional grails it would be her right?

The reality seems to be that there really isnt that many grail knights in brettonia. I mean if you postulate a rate of 1 grail knight per dukedom you would have around 10. Lets make it 30 on the assumption that bastonne and quellenes are particularly unpious and bereft of grails.

Instead grail knights should be a unit of one able to take on monsters and regiments by himself.

2. Foot option on questing knights- From what little in the novels ive read on questing knights they seem to be confronted with a variety of situations, some of which does not physically allow thier horse to accompany them so they should be trained on foot too.

3. Divide the knight of the realm choice- Well you can keep the generic knights of the realm but it seems obvious from reading the novels that knights from different dukedoms train with subtle differences. Enough so that you can actually make something like "knights of carcassone" or "knights of l'anguille" as valid choices. Maybe carcassone knights have one extra attack with swords? Regardless of what they actually give something like this would add a lot of different choices. (note that you dont need to add a choice for each dukedom)

4. Bring back the noble knights- The current incarnation of brettonian knights are a-holes. I vividly remember a scene where the fey enchantress is crying looking at a mirror and telling her subordinate that thousands upon thousands of brettonians will die if so and so is not accomplished since a huge chaos invasion occurs. I then snort and think to myself "you indirectly kill more peasants by letting the knights act the way they do. whats a few thousand more?"

I do understand gw is making it more historical, etc by linking it to what the actual knights did but these knights have the lady of the lake and morgana the fey to keep them honest. The historical knights may have had religion but nothing that personally appears and intereferes as much with thier daily lives as the lady does in brettonia.

Morquentas
19-10-2010, 13:42
Going to jump right in here as a very new Bretonnian player. You can blame my love of mediaeval history!

As far as actual miniatures are concerned, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to imagine 5 knight box sets with all the extras on sprues to make genuinely distinguishable Errants/Realm/Questing/Grail Knights. Or at least do plastic Grails that have a distinctive character to them. can anyone else tell the difference between knights of the realm and grail knights without really squinting at them? I'm sure the advances in plastics that GW have done recently would make all this possible, there's loads of stuff on each sprue now, and I think making more visual distinctions between the different ranks would have a huge impact.

I do think 8th ed is leaning towards being an infantrymans game. I agree with everyone that would like a slightly better infantry choice - making men-at-arms better would work, as would foot knights. Also, without going to far down the flagellant route, some sort of religious aspect, monks carrying relics and the like.

Ultimately I think the fluff needs to swing back again towards the nobler end of the spectrum. Even the Empire doesn't feel as dark and unpleasant as Bretonnia - it's this obsession GW has with making everything a dark and deeply unpleasant place to be. Dark is great, but it can get a bit much.

Morquentas
19-10-2010, 14:01
I'm warming to this topic...

I'd also like to see vows that worked similarly to Space Wolf sagas. It would help drive the narrative for each army.

dragonet111
19-10-2010, 15:18
Something like a virtue? :D

Rolf
19-10-2010, 15:59
I like that idea. Giving them a bonus and a negative at the same time. Something like you have 4+ ward against shooting, but you must charge all missie troops and warmachines.

Charistoph
19-10-2010, 23:05
Fluff-wise, the nobility should be sickeningly sweet, over-chivalrous, naive warriors that believe in all the stories, and do their obnoxious best to be the light of Bretonnia. They represent the romantic view of knights.

Conversely, the Peasantry represent the grim dark reality of the Warhammer world.

Kisanis
20-10-2010, 00:17
...distinguishing Bretonnia and the Empire. GW could have spun it many ways, but they kinda failed by giving the Empire everything and the kitchen sink. They could have drawn distinctions in different ways... secular versus religious, magic versus faith, or magic versus technology. Instead they made the empire a hyper-religious, magical, and techno-savy state. Leaving Bretonnia with less religion, less magic, and less technology.


I agree Completely, Empire has been getting Space Marine Treatment... I'm waiting for the Empire armylists to be joined by Laender army lists (a la chapters...)


For an army that is meant to be about fantastical knights, the armylist does a poor job. In my opinion the Dark elves and high elves books are alot better at being a fantasy knight army. The next Bretonnia book should take back this ground as being the archetype knight based fantasy army with a variety of different foot units to support the knights.
...
If there is a Bretonnian lore I do not want it to be the only lore that damsels can have. IMO lore of life is the perfect both rules wise and fluff. Talking of fluff, in the new book I want to know what happens to the boys when the Fey takes them, do they become grail knights, frogs, etc?

I really agree with your first point completely. For the 'Knight Armylist' brets field a terrible calv only list compared to other major Forces of Order (and Chaos).

This really needs to be addressed to allow them to progress.



3. Divide the knight of the realm choice- Well you can keep the generic knights of the realm but it seems obvious from reading the novels that knights from different dukedoms train with subtle differences. Enough so that you can actually make something like "knights of carcassone" or "knights of l'anguille" as valid choices. Maybe carcassone knights have one extra attack with swords? Regardless of what they actually give something like this would add a lot of different choices. (note that you dont need to add a choice for each dukedom)


I really think that would be exactly what we've been talking about when it comes to 'unit wide virtues' Just something where you can get a buff for points to help differentiate the units. Give us 1 per region and then the list will MASSIVELY improve in variety and options.

M@A, Bowmen, Squires, et al are the peasants of the Knights on the field, there must be some way to reflect this through the characters to help buff the infantry. For every Bret Char select a commoner unit, that unit gains the blessing, or stubborn, or whatever.

As for fixing M@A and therefore giving brets the better infantry choices? Upgrade a single M@A unit to 'Sergeants' for X/per model, give them Heavy Armour and another boon (heavy armour? Blessing?)

SamVimes
20-10-2010, 00:22
Fluff-wise, the nobility should be sickeningly sweet, over-chivalrous, naive warriors that believe in all the stories, and do their obnoxious best to be the light of Bretonnia. They represent the romantic view of knights.

Conversely, the Peasantry represent the grim dark reality of the Warhammer world.

So...they should all be Don Quixote?

I'm all for them returning to a less grim-dark representation, but let's not get too campy here.

Kisanis
20-10-2010, 00:28
So...they should all be Don Quixote?

I'm all for them returning to a less grim-dark representation, but let's not get too campy here.

So long as there isn't a windmill terrain piece...

but I really do agree with you that less grimdark doesn't always mean disney pure...

Charistoph
20-10-2010, 05:23
So long as there isn't a windmill terrain piece...

but I really do agree with you that less grimdark doesn't always mean disney pure...

Not Don Quixote (or necessarily Monte Python) campy or Disney pure, but more naively believing their own press, and ignoring, or simply not seeing, the grimness of their reality.

Kisanis
20-10-2010, 17:52
@Charistoph

I completely agree. I thing the 5th book really had a lot of pros in how everyone saw their nation. It may have been crappy and poor and terrible feudal, but since it was all they knew, it was fine by them. I don't think the current book is AS grimdark as they could have gone, but the complete dichotomy between Knights and Peasants, and the lack of something between (an elite infantry unit for example).

I really wish the reliquae wasn't as bad as it is. It's an interesting concept that could be tweaked to help fill this 'elite' infantry role, but as it is now, its just a moronic take on flagellents in concept (crazy religious zealots).

EffCee
20-10-2010, 18:02
^^^^ Grail Knights should be the best Knights in the game period. They should be like Blood Knights. Essentially on steroids. S7 on the charge, ethereal, and a random virtue given before the game: ASF, a higher ward, +1 W.S and +1 I, +1 A etc. . . If their supposed to be heavenly. Then they need to portray it.

I agree, that Grail Knights need to be improved. Both rules and models.
Currently the models are just so damn bland. Nothing about them says divine warriors. They look just like KofR with a little (and only a little) extra bling.

xv8
20-10-2010, 18:48
i find the grail knights bland so i just use kotr models with a different paint job 50 for 3 less models and some fancy shields and capes no thanks

dreamforge
20-10-2010, 19:01
definately need a rule that allows lance formation to break steadfast on the turn of charge and also cheaper M@A

Zaonite
20-10-2010, 19:43
definately need a rule that allows lance formation to break steadfast on the turn of charge and also cheaper M@A

If it ignores steadfast then I'd expect to need at least 15 knights in a unit and in the Lance formation.
Breaking steadfast is too powerful a rule I think. At the moment I just use multicharging as a way of robbing my enemy of his ranks. Flank with a small unit of knights and it goes away anyway due to disruption.

Something that allows us our attacks before the enemy would be great. Either ASF or I 10 on the turn they charge would help enormously. Even impact hits would be nice.

I do however like the afore mentioned Faith Points system. It has potential. Lots of potential!

Kisanis
20-10-2010, 22:59
Something that allows us our attacks before the enemy would be great. Either ASF or I 10 on the turn they charge would help enormously. Even impact hits would be nice.

I do however like the afore mentioned Faith Points system. It has potential. Lots of potential!

I completely agree with the ASF on the charge/I10 - Maybe save this for all but the errants, but then cheapen down the errants to make them a great heavy calv fodder force. As is, they just are too expensive!
Impact hits would also be cool (Maybe give Grail Knights this to again help separate them?)


I think the core concept of the army as is, is stable. The list has a solid foundation, it just has crap walls, roof, and structure.

Also, another beef with the current list is the complete lack of Ld10 generals... I find this beyond frustrating at times. Anyone else think that even Louen should have Ld 10?

Zaonite
21-10-2010, 00:59
Also, another beef with the current list is the complete lack of Ld10 generals... I find this beyond frustrating at times. Anyone else think that even Louen should have Ld 10?

Louen should have Ld 10. He is the king...
Well, thanks to the new errata we can now get Brets to Ld10. I used it this week at the club and it was such a boon. - I normally run my lord in a unit of Knights of the Realm. They can take a 25pt magic banner. So I gave them the Standard of Discipline from the BRB. This bumps your Lord to Ld10 and it benefits to his inspiring presence special rule :D

The army is very stable. This weekend gone I played a tourney and won two out of three games with my Brets! (lost the last one to the stupid fortitude mission)
This proves to some semblance that the army core is very stable.

I'd love ASF on the charge with Brets. High elves aren't gonna run up to you, smack you about and then run back to where they were stood so they can take a lance in the face!

I liked the idea that someone had with respect to giving units a "virtue" to differentiate between the provinces of bretonnia.
I could see these being quite varied and adding lots of character to the army. Just effects off the top of my head;

- impact hits
- magic resistance
- +1 S to mounts attacks
- strider special rule
- stubborn
- cause fear
- stomp
- frenzy
- hatred

I love wishlisting... Oooh! We could have the Black Knight and the Killer Rabbit! :p

Charistoph
21-10-2010, 02:22
I'd love ASF on the charge with Brets. High elves aren't gonna run up to you, smack you about and then run back to where they were stood so they can take a lance in the face!

Actually you mean Dark and Wood Elves. High Elves already start with ASF, and have a higher Initiative to boot, even if you factor in Swordmasters and White Lions having Great Weapons, they're still going to be running up the lance and smacking knights around. At least with I 10, they'd be able to deny the High Elves from rerolling.

Kisanis
21-10-2010, 02:45
- ignoring barding effects for purposes of movement



doesn't the 'bretonnian warhorse' still do this as a general rule??

Charistoph
21-10-2010, 06:53
doesn't the 'bretonnian warhorse' still do this as a general rule??

Indeed it does, making the Bretts the fastest non-Elf heavy cavalry in the game.

Zaonite
21-10-2010, 12:29
You are right good sirs. I got carried away! But the others are still valid and I edited it out :p

Zaonite
21-10-2010, 12:50
Actually you mean Dark and Wood Elves. High Elves already start with ASF, and have a higher Initiative to boot, even if you factor in Swordmasters and White Lions having Great Weapons, they're still going to be running up the lance and smacking knights around. At least with I 10, they'd be able to deny the High Elves from rerolling.

I merely chose HE as an example. In general I meant anything faster than them :p

dragonet111
21-10-2010, 13:42
Bretonnian have pegasus, royal pegasus and hippogriff. I would like to see other mounts, no dragons because Bretonnian are more used to hunt them:D but something like a grand hippogriff or the equivalent of a daemonic steed for knights with the Grail Vow, a Grail Steed (I can't find a better name for that)

xv8
21-10-2010, 16:40
asf for bretonnia means they will strike high elves at the exact same time with no one getin reroles

Kisanis
21-10-2010, 19:20
Bretonnian have pegasus, royal pegasus and hippogriff. I would like to see other mounts, no dragons because Bretonnian are more used to hunt them:D but something like a grand hippogriff or the equivalent of a daemonic steed for knights with the Grail Vow, a Grail Steed (I can't find a better name for that)

I really hate that the Royal Pegasus can't join pegasus knights...
I really think the brets should have a rule where a character on a pegasus or hippogrif can join peg knights. It would really be cool to see a lord on hipogriff leading a group of pegasus knights.

Brets being 1 dimensional as they are is not bad. They just need some tweaks to allow army list variety. (As we've already stated with the unit virtues, armour upgrades, etc...)

RichT
21-10-2010, 22:45
Higher Initiative or ASF on the charge would be pretty nice, also some rule to stop or limit steadfast so lances don't get stuck as soon as they hit any horde

KalEf
22-10-2010, 00:04
well as I've said before, It would be cool if they made all mounted brits count as monstrous cav, and have devastating charge. It would allow you to fight ok in later rounds, make for a fun and unique playing style, and the lance's special rule would already be in the main book then.

I already like the stat line for most of the troops, maybe +1s for the horses (good for their stomp then lol). Adding devastating charge, they would need a price hike anyway.

I would have the blessing do what it does now, but give out magic attacks as well.

Questing be beefed up to Immune to psy and grail knights to have hate like the old warrior priests did.

oh and no unit caps

those changes would do A LOT for the knights, with-out having to change them much.

btw
The banner of the lady would be really cool if it ignored steadfast, or made any unit touching it discount its first 4 ranks instead of just the first 1.

well that's my wish listing anyway :D

Cordantheman
22-10-2010, 00:15
I feel the lance formation needs to be changed again in order to compensate for recent releases because it has always been the mainstay of the army. Every time I think of a Bretonnian charge I think of that scene in Peter Jackson's LOTR when the Rohan charged into the Orcs.

Maybe giving it some much needed power by treating it like a chariot with the knights being crewmen (maybe a lil overpowered but getting more to the point.) I kinda like the idea of an army the focuses on mounted warfare and I understand the want to get away from that because of current rules but that is what Brets always have been. You simply need to buff Bret Calvary to make them viable again since it's the army's main focus.

I like the idea of an entire unit of knights on foot, but it simply doesn't make sense because Knights on foot generally depicted in movies have either been dismounted or were simply caught with there pants down. Knights generally fight mounted (as the extra armor allows them to charge forward without worry as they are weak on foot and units that are designed to fight on foot have much more maneuverable armor generally not worn by a "knight." Squires are not a combat unit, squires are the equal to neophytes in the Templar army and fight alongside knights with more of a support role learning from the experience of true knights in combat by experience.

The way current rules stand I don't virtues should cost any points at all and if they do they should be a special rule you can attach to an entire unit of knights and not a single champion with the limitation of what vow they had taken. This would make the already elite units of knights on par with other elite units within other armies.

Timofeo
22-10-2010, 05:11
I have Always liked the Idea of Knights of the Realm being WS 5 I think it reinforces the Training and life of Devotion to Bretonnia I mean I see them as being better trained than Mauraders and empire Swordsmen.

Bretonnia as a High Weapon Skill army I feel fits it doesnt change the fact that their still human, but it does make them more Knightly (ELITE)

Other Changes
Grail Knights need to be Better than any Knight in the game they are the epitome of Greatness they should be able to laugh in the face of the Disgusting Chaos Warriors Taint

No Knights on foot, sure when they need to Invade a Fortress they hop on foot, but has anyone played a Basic Warhammer Fantasy game that involved taking a Castle over?? Maybe throw in a rule when assaulting a building they go in on foot. But in reality its not needed MOST Warhammer Fantasy games are played on an open field with 25% covered in Hills, Forests, Marshes, rivers, Fences, Hedges, Mystical Monuments, and Buildings like Houses, Bars, and Inns The Closest most of us get to Sieging anything is the Watchtower.

Knights Errant drop to 18 points a piece

Men at Arms are good how they are, but I agree they should cost 4 and have the 0.5 pt option for Halbreds and Spears as a free swap lets face it you wont even consider spears less its a free swap with HW's its either more attacks or a parry save.
Halbreds half point making them cheaper slightly at least then a Empire Halbridier (better stats)

Bowmen are fine remove skirmish limit or make it 0-2

Yoemen on foot is Good

Questing Knights should gain WS 6

Add in Knights with Outflanking type rule but not Green Knights, maybe put them in Light armor and keep the shield making them Fast Calvary Knights of the Realm stat line.

Better Characters, New Special Characters
A Robin Hood Special Character for the Bowmen Scouts Multi shots to whole unit and BS 6 A Strong Man (Little John type) for the Men at arms Big Guy S4 WS3 A2 Gives the Unit some sort of special rule maybe Stubborn first round of combat since they are so pumped to watch him fight. AND MORE CHIVALRY ARMY OF OBNOXIUS DO-GOODERS NOT EVIL IN-BRED SLAVE DRIVERS

Thats all I got for now
Man I love Bretonnia.

jumai
22-10-2010, 09:26
Might just be my inexperience, but I'm really not getting why people are so hard on the lance formation, especially when what everyone wants is a way to defeat Steadfast.

15 Knights Errant (321 points with command) average just over 8 kills on the charge against a T3 target with no save against them, or close to 7 against something with a parry save. To reduce a 5x8 unit to 5 complete ranks, you need to kill 11 goobers. Is 4-5 shooting casualties really such a strenuous prerequisite for auto-breaking a huge block of guys?

I assume you're taking a damsel anyway, she can join the unit so it has a spare guy to lose before it drops to 4 ranks, and she won't even have to worry about getting targetted. And who'd have thought, a use for Pann's Impenetrable Pelt... with T6, W2 and Blessing, she might even challenge and tank a defensive build hero for a turn. The unit champion would never live it down with the other knights, but that's beside the point.

If it all goes to pot, you can still combat reform.


Even if I'm wrong about all that, I still fail to see how knights of the realm breaking ranks in 3x2 formation is so terrible.


edit: ok, actually, if there must be something, how's this for an idea?
"Whenever a unit in the lance formation successfully completes a charge, it counts as having 1 additional rank in the following combat phase."
That would help Brets fight steadfast in the established manner (having ranks) without making deep infantry units awful against them. It would also allow 3x1 flankers, which honestly I don't have a problem with, and gives 3x2 units an extra point of combat res.
It has one funny interaction with overrunning/persuing into an engaged enemy and fighting a second combat in one phase, but if someone wants to count 2 extra ranks AND fight twice with their knights, whack him with a rolled up newspaper.

Christophbs
23-10-2010, 00:04
Men at Arms are good how they are, but I agree they should cost 4 and have the 0.5 pt option for Halbreds and Spears as a free swap lets face it you wont even consider spears less its a free swap with HW's its either more attacks or a parry save.
Halbreds half point making them cheaper slightly at least then a Empire Halbridier (better stats)

You need to keep in mind that the points you pay represent the usefulness of that unit within the context of its own army book. If both High Elves and Dwarfs had the option to take an infantry unit with the stats of a Chaos Warrior it would be ridiculously expensive for High Elves becuase it would become more important due to the fact it strengthens one of there armies biggest weaknesses, frail infantry where as Dwarfs do not suffer from frail infantry at all. (Conversly you could argue that Dwarfs would get a quicker infantry unit and it's a bigger bonus but this is just an example).

Chris_
23-10-2010, 01:25
well as I've said before, It would be cool if they made all mounted brits count as monstrous cav, and have devastating charge. It would allow you to fight ok in later rounds, make for a fun and unique playing style, and the lance's special rule would already be in the main book then.

I already like the stat line for most of the troops, maybe +1s for the horses (good for their stomp then lol). Adding devastating charge, they would need a price hike anyway.I guess this is just from a game mechanics perspective? There is no way a Bretonnian Warhorse would be massive enough to pull off monstrous cav. A +1 on Strength I could understand, but MC? They are still "normal" warhorses.

The lance seems quite okay to me, what is needed for the Brets knights is some way they can be a little bit more effective in the secondary combat rounds. Not too effective as the biggest punch should still be in the charge. Some kind of unit vows would be nice (one that adds Devastating Charge perhaps :) ). If they need higher WS then the KotR should be 5 and Grail and Questing 6. (7 for a non-character is way too much)

The M@A could need some other options than Halbs/Spears. 4 point base with light armour and hand weapon (free swap spears), 0,5p for shield and 0,5p for halbs.

KalEf
23-10-2010, 05:53
I guess this is just from a game mechanics perspective? There is no way a Bretonnian Warhorse would be massive enough to pull off monstrous cav. A +1 on Strength I could understand, but MC? They are still "normal" warhorses.

The lance seems quite okay to me, what is needed for the Brets knights is some way they can be a little bit more effective in the secondary combat rounds. Not too effective as the biggest punch should still be in the charge. .

lol well at least you answered your own question. no, no-one thinks brit horses are 9 feet tall. It is for game dynamics.

As it stands now, they already gain the first benefit: getting rank bonus for being 3 wide

they can also make multiple attacks from rear ranks. (though only on the charge)

Changing them to "counting as" monstrous cav with devastating charge would
A: put the special rules they are using in the main rule book. a positive for anyone who doesn't buy their opponent's book. Plus referencing the core rule book's special rules, seems to be the way GW is pointing things
B: you can fight in a hoard if you want!
C: devastating charge, could make for a truly devastating charge. Though it is only really awesome if people fighting in ranks get their full set of attacks.
D: think about a hoard of 18 grail knights. they would get 54 attacks on the charge! but still get to fight with 2 attacks each in subsequent round of combat. :angel:

This would help to make the knights a -little bit more effective in the secondary combat rounds. Not too effective as the biggest punch should still be in the charge-

the other fun affect, would be making the hippogriph viable! ;) especially if it had a rule about keeping thunder stomp. :shifty:

If I was writing the flavor text, there would be some bit about them being born in the saddle and about extensive training. Followed by some excuse about how they are so coordinated, it is like 1 giant beast slamming into the enemy, etc... they call this devastating formation the lance, etc... all mounted brits count as monstrous cav with devastating charge.

Anyhow, that's why I want it


On the list of things I don't want to see, a huge stat hike.
KotR are humans. And grail knights have a crazy good statline for anyone! The only people in the warhammer world with higher WS are wardancers, chaos chosen, and swordmasters. To be honest... they have probably gotten more practice in than the grail knights. (and no, the extra 50-60 years the grail knight lives, is not an impressive amount of time to any of those 3.) If the grail knights get a stat boost, then everyone will want a stat boost.

Chris_
23-10-2010, 06:19
The MC is still not a very good idea. It would actually be worse than the lance. Sure they would rank up the same way and the horses would get stomp :wtf: BUT they would get less attacks on the charge (except if in a horde formation) as it is only Monstrous Infantry that gets boost to support attacks, not MC. So the Grail Knights would still only be able to make 1 supporting attack each.

Even in a horde 6x3 formation it would still only be 18 knight attacks and 6 horse attacks + 6 stomp whereas now (if they could get 18 in a unit...) would have 14 knight attacks and 13 horse attacks. With the non-horde way you would only have 6 knight attacks, 3 horse attacks and 3 stomp.

No, I think the lance is actually quite good the way it is right now.

Shield of Freedom
23-10-2010, 07:21
Here's a breakdown of what I would like to see. Obviously points would need to be adjusted and I haven't done them. Even if I say "no change" I'm not implying the points should stay the same... although sometimes they should.

Also, this hasn't been thought out THAT much but it's a good start in my opinion.

Lord:
Duke (As current Bretonnian Lord)
Prophetess
(smattering of special characters)

Hero:
Paladin
Damsel
(smattering of special characters)

Core:
Knights Errant with max unit size removed (no banner option)
Knights of the Realm with max unit size removed (othewise unchanged)
Peasant Free companies (as current Men-at-arms w/optional shield)
Men-at-arms (WS3, Ld7 w/optional shield)
Peasant Bowmen (no skirmish option, otherwise unchanged)
Squires (WS3, BS3, Ld7, bows instead of longbows, skirmish, no option for flaming arrows)

Special:
Pegasus Knights (no change)
Questing Knights (no change)
Grail Reliquae (no change)
Mounted Yeomen (no change)
Field Ballista (ancient bolt thrower that allows armor saves but is armor piercing, basically less effective)

Rare:
Grail Knights (T4 at least, no other opinion on changes... for now)
Field Trebuchet (options for different types of ammunition. Flaming, boiling oil (toughness test, no armor), dead cow (S2/S4 blast that causes panic even if no wounds caused), etc.
The Green Knight (yes, not a character and 0-1)

Mount options:
Hippogryph
Royal Pegasus
Demi-gryph (flightless, slightly less powerful gryphon on a monsterous cavalry base)

At the end of the book should be an appendix that gives point values for ALL knight types (excpet pegasus knights) to be on foot instead of mounted with a stipulation that these rules are to be used in agreement with your opponent ONLY for siege battles where the Bretonnian player would rather have some knights on foot to either defend or attack the walls of a keep or castle. This would be VERY conveniet if the book were to directly follow or directly preceed a Warhammer Siege suppliment book!

hmmm... having typed that... Forget the appendix and simply place those rules in the new seige book instead (assuming one is EVER made).

Rolf
23-10-2010, 08:46
I agree with everything written above.

Although I like the idea of a mosterous cavalary mount, the Demi-gryph sounds very empirish. I think Warhammer Forge has even made one for them.

Shield of Freedom
23-10-2010, 09:39
I also don't feel that the Grail Knights should get any stat bump other than a toughness of 4. That's not unheard of for humans.

After all, where would that leave the Paladin if Grail Knights were WS6 and I6?

So... my unit of one wound models with 2 attacks each is led by a less skilled Paladin Grail Knight? Makes no sense.

As it is, the only difference between a Paladin and Grail Knight is the vow (the Paladin can get it though), one extra attack, one extra toughness, and one extra wound.

KalEf
23-10-2010, 14:26
The MC is still not a very good idea. It would actually be worse than the lance. Sure they would rank up the same way and the horses would get stomp :wtf: BUT they would get less attacks on the charge (except if in a horde formation) as it is only Monstrous Infantry that gets boost to support attacks, not MC. So the Grail Knights would still only be able to make 1 supporting attack each.

Even in a horde 6x3 formation it would still only be 18 knight attacks and 6 horse attacks + 6 stomp whereas now (if they could get 18 in a unit...) would have 14 knight attacks and 13 horse attacks. With the non-horde way you would only have 6 knight attacks, 3 horse attacks and 3 stomp.


lol this is just plain wrong. :eyebrows: read the main book and errata that came out right after the main book did, again.

lance meaning -monsterous cav+devistating chage- is way more good attacks than the lance meaning -as long as you're 3 wide the knight and the horse can attack from the sides on the charge- and it allows for more options.

It is ok if the idea leaves a bad taste in your mouth, but please get your fax straight first.


I also don't feel that the Grail Knights should get any stat bump other than a toughness of 4. That's not unheard of for humans.

that is true

Chris_
24-10-2010, 00:32
lol this is just plain wrong. :eyebrows: read the main book and errata that came out right after the main book did, again.

lance meaning -monsterous cav+devistating chage- is way more good attacks than the lance meaning -as long as you're 3 wide the knight and the horse can attack from the sides on the charge- and it allows for more options.

It is ok if the idea leaves a bad taste in your mouth, but please get your fax straight first.I missed the errata, fail of me for thinking they where doing something right :p

Yes, of course devastating charge + monstrous cav would then mean more attacks. That would mean 6 knights (3x2) would get 13 knight attacks, 3 horse attacks and 3 stomp. Further addition would do nothing.
Whereas now they (with devastating charge) would get 12 attacks + 3 horse attacks. But the thing here is that an addition of 2 knights in the lance would give 4 extra attacks but in your version, nothing.

I still think the lance seems quite okay, don't really see where making them MC would be soo much better. Getting the knights some more options, maybe devastating charge or something else that makes them more viable in the 2nd round (and not thanks to Stomp please...) is what they lack.

Oh, btw, tried straightening out my fax ;) Did nothing, damn hard. The idea does not leave a bad taste in my mouth, I just don't see how it is better than the lance.

Trains_Get_Robbed
24-10-2010, 01:20
Grail knights need to be ridiculous in stats. Essentially blood knights on steriods. T4 and ethereal, I 6 s5. 2 atcks asf on charge and a 1 plus 5 plus plus.

For lords and paladins if given a vow like grails or quest you gain those abilities. However one can only take certain vows (which would be free) that are associated with the vow. In addition to grail knight being on roids heroes and lords need be as well.

KalEf
24-10-2010, 06:37
I missed the errata, fail of me for thinking they where doing something right :p

Yes, of course devastating charge + monstrous cav would then mean more attacks. That would mean 6 knights (3x2) would get 13 knight attacks, 3 horse attacks and 3 stomp. Further addition would do nothing.
Whereas now they (with devastating charge) would get 12 attacks + 3 horse attacks. But the thing here is that an addition of 2 knights in the lance would give 4 extra attacks but in your version, nothing.

I still think the lance seems quite okay, don't really see where making them MC would be soo much better. Getting the knights some more options, maybe devastating charge or something else that makes them more viable in the 2nd round (and not thanks to Stomp please...) is what they lack.

Oh, btw, tried straightening out my fax ;) Did nothing, damn hard. The idea does not leave a bad taste in my mouth, I just don't see how it is better than the lance.

I guess no one uses the same quick text version of the word facts, I do. :rolleyes: On the positive side, I'm glad you spent the time reading through the rules! ;)

The first point, is to have their special rules be in the main rule book.

Second... you're missing the other opportunities
yes you can do something with the 2 knights, yes they are stronger in L8er rounds, yes you have more options... and all through having less special rules!

As far as having 9 KotR: If I were setting them up with the current rule +devastating charge, they would get 16 attacks and 7 horse attacks on the charge.
Being MC's+devastating charge, you would have the option of either going for the depth and "only" getting 13 attacks/ 3horse +3stomp(witch might as well be 6 more horse attacks) or going for the kills and getting 19knight attacks/ 5 horse attacks+5stomp attacks

About later rounds
Round 2 (if armor goes well) would be
7knight/3horse or
7knight/3horse/3stomp or
10Knight/5horse/5stomp

And this is just the KotR. With grail knights... :D

Options! It gives them more options and does something very similar to what they are doing now. Plus, they don't have to make any new special rules, and this still makes them special. In fact, they can get rid of some! Again, You don't have to like it. It is just what I would like to see.

Chris_
24-10-2010, 07:18
Options! It gives them more options and does something very similar to what they are doing now. Plus, they don't have to make any new special rules, and this still makes them special. In fact, they can get rid of some! Again, You don't have to like it. It is just what I would like to see.And that's all good man, but I'd rather like to see a way of making them a little bit better with something that can actually be supported by fluff too. ;)

jayzerus
25-10-2010, 03:10
Peasants and men at arms should be two separate units.

Peasants - the rabble. WS2, light armor and/or shield, hand weapons, ld5

Men at arms - the better rabble. WS3, light armor, shields and spears. Upgradeable to halberds, billmen, pikemen, etc... Maybe LD6, LD7 with a champ.

Charistoph
25-10-2010, 08:16
How would a bill work for a billman? Should it be able to be used as a spear or a halberd?

gestur666
25-10-2010, 14:19
Instead of devastating charge, what about a slight change in lanceformation allowing all knights and horses to attack on the charge?

VoodooJanus
25-10-2010, 14:24
Since GW has seemed so keen on pigeon-holing Brets into the 'Dark Ages' fantasy race, why not bring in some monasticism?

I was thinking about perhaps adding a new 'Monk' hero choice, not magically inclined, but support oriented? Giving serious bonuses to whatever 'faith-based' perks the unit they join might receive. He wouldn't be a 'warrior-monk' though, as that's pretty much been taken by the Empire. Just an option that helps increase diversity. Maybe even bring in some elite 'Monastery Guard'.

Just some thoughts.

Gustovic
25-10-2010, 20:39
Foot knights. 0-1 or something like this.
Two types: anti-light infantry and anti-heavy infantry.
The first one with weapon and shield.
The second with great weapons and/or two handed weapons.
Maybe skirmishers.

Man at arms.
Or tone down the cost or pimp up the stats with WS3 and Ld6
Compulsory halberd or replace it with weapon and shield. If with weapon and shield can buy a lance.
Heavy armour.

Paesant horde.
They would replace the current M@A. Cheap. Hand weapon and light armour. Optional sheld.

Knights.
Pimp up the lance formation. Maybe davastating charge.

Grail Knight.
Pimp them up!! They're the best warhammer calvalry!! Ward save 4+ (and make so with all the characters with the Grail vow).

Characters.
Maybe a little more room for customizing. Allow royal peg. characters join royal peg. knights.

Ballista.
A cheap and weaker one.

Crossbowmen.
With pavisemen giving a better save. Move or shoot.

Archers.
Allow to buy bodkin arrows (penetrating arrows, maybe just for light armoured targets)

Trebuchet.
Allow more projectile options (flaming ammo, dead cows, ecc...).

Make all the army boosted if in line of sight with a dimisel or similar.

Kisanis
26-10-2010, 00:05
Peasants and men at arms should be two separate units.

Peasants - the rabble. WS2, light armor and/or shield, hand weapons, ld5

Men at arms - the better rabble. WS3, light armor, shields and spears. Upgradeable to halberds, billmen, pikemen, etc... Maybe LD6, LD7 with a champ.

I agree on the infantry part. There needs to be two seperate core choices for infantry. Maybe upgrade to Heavy armour (as was said earlier, like a household sergeant unit)



How would a bill work for a billman? Should it be able to be used as a spear or a halberd?

Maybe they ignore 2nd rank attacks (using the billhook?)

Personally I am against the Ballista idea as it makes brets less and less what they are supposed to be (anti war machine). Instead they need to add some more flavour to the current bland knights.

I really like the idea of the Green Knight being a Rare Choice and not a Char.

I think the reliquae could definetly stand to get upgraded/modernized into 8th to allow it to play really well as an anvil unit. Just this stubborn block of infantry that ties up whatever is in combat with it so you can push knights on flanks.

I think our special choices are ok as is (just in need of tweaking). I even think the core have a solid footing, they just need that little extra somehting to bring variety to the lists (and too see competitive lists that don't involve treb and peasant spamming).

theunwantedbeing
26-10-2010, 00:19
Virtues not coming out of item allowance.
Knight Champions for all Peasant Units (with lots of equiptment options)
Knight Champions allowed to take virtues/magical items upto 25pts
All Knights able to accept challenges (but not issue them)
Trebuchet ammo options (cow, stone, etc)

Not a lot of changes to be honest, just a few things to add a bit of extra flavour and variety to the army.
eg. peasant hoarde where every unit has a knight on foot leading them

Grail Knight's are already uber enough, they just need something like a 4+ ward as standard to really make them fit the fluff.
I'm not sure that allowing Grail Knight Character's is right, although limiting them to only joining grail knight units would be reasonable. (they'll still get look out, sir! from nearby knight units afterall).

The blessing could do with a change as well, although what to I haven't a clue.

They don't need to be overly uber in any way, more just getting +1 modfiers and re-rolls and such for a lot of the virtues. ie. +1 to wound, +1 to hit, re-roll to wound, re-roll to hit, re-roll armour, magical attacks, flaming attacks. Most of which will be on the charge only of course.

One thing I'll be sad to see lost is the option to give all character's morning stars (all champions need to be allowed to have one as well) in addition to any other weapons they may have (like the obligatory lance, or great weapon). It's a useful if almost never seen weapon that only the Bretonnians use now.

Similarly I like the lance as it is. It works nicely and looks right (especially if we remove the unit size restrictions and maybe impose a limit of no more than 5 ranks of knights attacking).
Although going back to the old arrowhead formation would be quite cool, although more so for bowmen than knights.

Hive Fleet Snackin'
26-10-2010, 00:23
I don't necessarily agree that Grail Knights need to be hands-down the best cavalry in the game. For example, the Vampire Counts Army Book clearly states that they are no match for Blood Knights.

However, I don't think upping their T to 4, making their ward save a base 5+, and perhaps upping their weapon skill by 1 would make them brokenly overpowered.

Questing Knights need something to offset the speed at which their weapons attack. In my experience it's a better gamble to throw a block of KotR with the flaming attacks banner at something like the hydra than a block of Questing Knights. You're looking at losing around 2 (Questing Knights, that is) of them in each round of combat, before attacks are even made, requiring a somewhat hefty and expensive unit just to grind down most monsters.

Further, once those monsters are dead, the Questing Knights lack a clear niche in the army- they might wound often, but their attacks are so few and their weapon skill fairly mediocre, to the point where they will never make a fast or significant dent in large enemy units.

Dropping their points sharply and turning them into the foot mounted knights others have suggested would probably fit that bill.

A reroll to-hit for all Knights on the charge would be an acceptable alternative to devastating charge, in my opinion. I've always had terrible luck with 10 or so Knight attacks on the charge and only hitting with 3 of them. That's part of the reason so many players constantly snark about the horses really being the shining star of the army.

Charistoph
26-10-2010, 05:17
If Peasant Levy replace the M@A for the Bret's horde infantry, they should carry spears as default, to represent the farm implements that they have access to.

Shield of Freedom
26-10-2010, 05:38
I think changing our halberds to bills with a different rule would be kinda cool.

How about making it cheaper (1/2 point instead of a full points worth) and simply make it "requires two hands" and "armor piercing." No strength bonus?

Since the halberd was the pinnicle of polearms and the bill one of the first, this makes a little sense.

McBaine
26-10-2010, 09:04
I'm not sure that allowing Grail Knight Character's is right,

Why not ? The King and at least the Dukes of Quennelles, Aquitaine and Bastonne are Grail Knights. So why should there be a problem ? Sometimes, a migthy hero drinks from the grail, it happens.

theunwantedbeing
26-10-2010, 09:32
Why not ? The King and at least the Dukes of Quennelles, Aquitaine and Bastonne are Grail Knights. So why should there be a problem ? Sometimes, a migthy hero drinks from the grail, it happens.

Okay, that's 4 grail knight character's, all easily do-able by making them all special character's.

I guess my point was more along the lines of "why does every hero have to have the grail vow when the grail is so rare?".

I didn't say I was totally against the idea anyway.

McBaine
26-10-2010, 12:15
I don't think the grail is so rare. You have to go on a quest, but then it's all you can drink. The original Grail knights didn't even Quest for it, the Lady just gave it to them and the son of Gilles made it a tradition to search for it.
If they wanted they could assemble all the knights and make them grail knights in an afternoons time.
But ok, they have to search it. It takes time, not everyone makes it. On the other hand grail knights live a very long life. A grail knight can live extremely long. The King is in his 90's and still seems to be young and strong. Thirulf of Lyonesse falls in battle 164 years after he drank from the grail. Even if he was very young when he became a grail knight (lets just say 16 to make it round) he didn't die of a natural cause and was at least 180 years old.

What I'm trying to say is this:
Grail knights are not so rare like everybody seems to think for two reasons
1. It may be hard to become one, but they last - maybe for generations who also have some knights becoming grail knights.
2. These 4 examples above are just official dukes who are grail knights. I can give you some other examples like the holy knight, Sir Almaric or Gravainne le Beau. At one point it was stated that nearly every grail chapel is guarded by a grail knight. And Paladins have a better chance to become grail knights than Rank and File Questing knights, so there is no reason to say that not so much heroes should have the grail vow. It's even more likely.

When the king leads the army, there isn't even a 0-1 restriction for grail knights.
All in all, not as rare as you think...

Rolf
26-10-2010, 13:58
maybe they should alter the fluff to make them more rare.

Making Grail Knights a monsterous cavalry, would make the knights different, and add fit the idea of them been uber knights

I'd love cavalry to have stomp. I've always felt horses are underpower in warhammer.

Sedge
26-10-2010, 15:58
Are we happy with the characters as they are at the moment? Heros, Lords, Prophetess and Damsels. Do we want anything else? Commoner heros, warrior preists, Green knight non special etc.

It would be nice to have something similar to empire warrior preist to give hatred but thats been done. Possibly gives killing blow to unit? Hows about a Friar on a pony and cart with a big barrel of beer that give bonuses to units close by?

I like the idea of having a unit of knights with something other than lance or double handed weapon; a morning star or mace might be good.

McBaine
26-10-2010, 16:21
Making Grail Knights a monsterous cavalry, would make the knights different, and add fit the idea of them been uber knights

No, it would make them "normal" Knights who ride monstrous beasts. Being monstrous cavalry has nothing to do with the rider, but with the mount.
At best they would be knights on uber mounts.

EDIT: But giving bretonnian warhorses S4 would give a nice boost. They are supposed to be strong enough to carry a full armoured knight and barding without penality.

Haravikk
26-10-2010, 17:49
More than anything I want larger differences between, KotR, Errant Knight, Questing Knights and Grail Knights.
I agree with this, I tend to just look at Knights Errant as the threat of them charging when you don't want them to is rarely a big deal for me. And things just get really strange trying to decide which of four very similar knights units to choose from. Would be easier too if they listed their psychology benefits in the army list rather than just their vow that you have to then look up.

I'm uncertain about making Grail Knights specifically a combat machine, but they should serve as an example to other knights, and bolster them, meaning that several units of knights led by a unit of grail knights would very hard to stop.

In any event, the lance formation keeps Brettonian cavalry surprisingly competitive, and a field trebuchet is just horrifying to face. So I don't think anything too drastic is needed to "fix" the list for 8th, but some more flavour between the four types of knights would be very beneficial.

Hive Fleet Snackin'
26-10-2010, 20:21
Are we happy with the characters as they are at the moment? Heros, Lords, Prophetess and Damsels. Do we want anything else? Commoner heros, warrior preists, Green knight non special etc.



Revamping and readding the older edition characters would definitely add more flavor to the army, as a couple of posters have mentioned.

Aside from simply reintroducing models like Bertrand and Repanse, I'd like to see the Fey Enchantress go down to a single cavalry model, not a monster, and allow her to sit inside a lance like any ordinary Damsel/Prophetess, instead of forcing her ride in the front rank as a character.

Likewise, I'd prefer the Green Knight to become a monster with Thunderstomp to add a little 'oomph.'

Zaonite
26-10-2010, 20:44
As Hive Fleet Snackin' says.

Return of old characters and taking Silvaron down to a regular cav model would do nicely.
I like the concept of the Green Knight as mentioned earlier as a 0-1 rare choice, with the addition of some stompy goodness.

As for additional characters I'd like to see a Peasant character for very cheap. With a magic item allowance for items only from the BRB.

Brets don't need more infantry. The current ones just need that little tweak.
I'd like to see more ways to differentiate between the different knight units.

Bretonnians are supposed to be the warrior elite of the humans on the Warhammer world. I'd propose a bump up in WS of 1 to every knight unit. Or at least to the characters.

Malorian
26-10-2010, 21:36
Bretonnians are supposed to be the warrior elite of the humans on the Warhammer world. I'd propose a bump up in WS of 1 to every knight unit. Or at least to the characters.

Are they?

Or are they just the social elite who get to ride around on horses?


To me WS 3 for knight errant, 4 for Knight of the realm, and 5 for grail knight seems spot on. I'm just on the fence on if a questing knight should be 4 or 5...

Awilla the Hun
26-10-2010, 23:31
Comrades, I've said it before, and I've said it again. Bretonnians do not need "better" infantry. The mighty Red Guardsman cannot be improved upon with such Reactionary-Militarist-Monarchist-Capitalist-Imperialist concepts as "improved" armour and weapons (all of which are more complex, and thus more open to the works of Wreckers and Saboteurs!) Better training is also irrelevant, as it will eliminate their key advantage: their devotion to the teachings of the Revolution (and their peasant's duty.)

No, Comrades. The Bretonnians were originally concieved as a heavy cavalry army. Better armed, armoured and drilled infantry-like dismounted knights-may well be more realistic (the English used dismounted Knights extensively), but it isn't Bretonnian. It smacks far too much of the Empire. Bretonnian infantry is supposed to hold up and/or grind the enemy down, keeping them away from the Knights' flanks. (Or, for infantry generals, win battles, but heavy cavalry is the main hammer.) The only "elite" they need is the slightly more damaging block that is the Reliquae: a unit capable of holding the enemy off with stubborness without having masses of ranks. Moreover, Men at Arms even approaching Imperial levels of arms drill and discipline (those Spearmen are well fed, long serving professionals-Chaos Warriors just make them look bad because... well, they're Chaos Warriors. The Man at Arms is a brutalised, poorly fed soldier) is frankly unfluffy. Unarmed mobs of peasants are, in addition, also not especially fluffy. The Lord isn't going to give his peasants precisely no proper equipment, as the King will get angry if his levies are too abysmal. "Just enough" (poke a sack of straw with an improvised pitchfork and some cobbled together armour) is all that's needed. Besides, the Lord needs them to work his lands, and pay his tithes!

All they need is to be made cheaper. 5 points per man at arms (when a fully equipped clanrat is also 5 points, but better in most respects) is far too much. In addition, an option not to give them any "special" weapons-just hand weapon and shield (so as they can actually use those massive tower shields for something apart from missile protection under the new rules) could also be useful.

Similarly, whilst I wouldn't be against medieval "nastiness" in larger quantities (boiling oil, more morning stars/poleaxes/other obscure melee weapons, caltrops and suchlike-although it may not be fitting for their army), a wider variety of artillery /crossbows is also un Bretonnian. Their society is against innovation, on the whole, as well as making "common" things that can harm the Knights. (It is down to the Revolution, Comrades, to prove these arrogant aristocratic pig-dogs the error of their foolish and erroneous notions!) Besides, if the Empire...Imperialists can't get stuff like bodkins, ballistae etc (or use them with any in game effect), then why should the Bretonnians?

EDIT: Also, the way people are going on about how the "normal" Knights should have better WS is frankly rather odd, and slightly insulting to the Empire. Imperial Swordsmen, for example, are themselves trained soldiers, and devoted to the defence of the Empire (or at least are no more corrupt than the Knights.) Greatswords are toughened Veterans of many campaigns, exceptionally skilled with the blade. They are therefore just as good as a Knight in the art of chopping stuff up.

Psygon
27-10-2010, 04:44
Bravo, Awilla, Bravo!

I would much rather have somewhat equip peasants that are cheaper than today's peasants rather than "official" peasants and "rabble" peasants. More peasants equals more help. Better equip peasants simply displace the role of the knight (atleast in most situations). In a way, they would almost be Skaven-esque (Slavie like) in that fact that they are so darn cheap. But you can't do all that much with extremely cheap (numerous), poor soldiers (damage, I mean). Thus, we have Knights (of the Realm).

My thoughts on the "medieval 'nastiness'" is that morning stars should have a larger role in the Bretonnian army. I don't believe they are used anywhere else except for Paladins and Lords, and I think the role of the morning star could be more prominent, such as allowing all knights come equip with (or be upgraded with) said morning stars and allow the use of them after a rather devastating (or perhaps not) charge with lances.

Turn 1. Lance (If charging)
Turn 2. Morning star (if charging)
Turn 3. Hand weapon

An expanded role for the largely ignored morning star may grant Bretonnia a bit more of an edge and provide a step upward, back towards the knightly dominance of years past...

And as for the WS increase for knights, I would rather keep it as it as. Best not to ask for too much in one book (Also, I would rather have the knights decrease in cost, rather than increase...)

McBaine
27-10-2010, 09:23
Moreover, Men at Arms even approaching Imperial levels of arms drill and discipline (those Spearmen are well fed, long serving professionals-Chaos Warriors just make them look bad because... well, they're Chaos Warriors. The Man at Arms is a brutalised, poorly fed soldier)

Men at Arms ARE trained. What you say may be true for the peasant on the field, but the Bretonnian book says on page 52:
"Each midsummer, commoners flock their lord's castle to present their sons in the hope that they will be trained as men-at-arms."

They are given room and board (page 53), and while it is only a straw matress and a supply of gruel and stew, they are fed. The spartans did the same, their soldiers possessed quite nothing, but this was to harden them, and the spartans where a very strong kind of soldiers in their time. While I'm not saying our Men at Arms should have the level of spartan warriors, I want to show that it can't be that their Profile is so low because they are untrained and poorly fed.
Also, they ARE long serving professionals.
"When the knight is summoned awa to war he will take many of these troops with him [...]"
In more peaceful times (does these words alligned in such a matter make even sense in the warhammer world ?) they watch the borders of the domain and patrol the knights land.
What do the Imperial Spearmen do more ?

Making Men at Arms "better" is only making them average, like other humans like them. WS3 is not the uber improvement, but I can't see why spearmen of the empire should have this average human stat and the men at arms - who fulfil exactly the same deeds - do not.
Make a Peasant rabble unit, give them WS2 and make them dirt cheap, but the trained men at arms should have WS3.


Besides, if the Empire...Imperialists can't get stuff like bodkins, ballistae etc (or use them with any in game effect), then why should the Bretonnians?
The Empire is more advanced. It's not that they couldn't, they just don't want to. When did you hear of the last time that somebody robbed a liquor store with a crossbow ? They will use a gun. It's more advanced, easyer to use and hide and easyer to get (because the crossbow isn't widely produced anymore for the previous reasons).
It's the same thing. Why should the empire build Ballistas when they have the technology to build cannons, mortars and the like. Everybody would just look at them like WTF ?
"Sir, we have build a weapon system... It's a giant slingshot !"
"I kinda hoped for an improved version of the stinger missile..."

(On a side note: Dwarfs use gunpowder and older weapons together because of the strong sense of tradition, just saying before someone smart will point that out to me...)

I'm not saying Bretonnians should get Ballistas. But it would fit in their technological advancement.


Also, the way people are going on about how the "normal" Knights should have better WS is frankly rather odd, and slightly insulting to the Empire.
I find it slightly insulting that empire spearmen have a higher WS than bretonnian spearmen. But I said my piece about that above.
Normal Knights shouldn't imo, but grail knights are a whole different level.

Odin
27-10-2010, 13:23
I'd go with the following main changes:

1. Units of Questing Knights on foot

2. A new war machine, probably ballista

3. Virtues separate from Magic Item allowance, but some of the OP items recosted.

4. More special characters, including the return of some of the old ones

5. 25 point Magic item allowance for Grail Knight and Questing Knight unit champions.

Overall though, the Bretonnian book still stands up pretty well. The footknights should add a bit of extra tactical flexibility, and help with Watchtower or Siege based scenarios.

Vazalaar
27-10-2010, 14:37
I'd go with the following main changes:

1. Units of Questing Knights on foot

2. A new war machine, probably ballista

3. Virtues separate from Magic Item allowance, but some of the OP items recosted.

4. More special characters, including the return of some of the old ones

5. 25 point Magic item allowance for Grail Knight and Questing Knight unit champions.

Overall though, the Bretonnian book still stands up pretty well. The footknights should add a bit of extra tactical flexibility, and help with Watchtower or Siege based scenarios.


I agree with the foot knights and I think they will make the cut.
I don't see a need for an another army with a bolt thrower variant.
The Green Knight would be an excellent rare choice. I also think we will see at least something big so they can show of their plastic technology.

Odin
27-10-2010, 15:29
I agree with the foot knights and I think they will make the cut.
I don't see a need for an another army with a bolt thrower variant.
The Green Knight would be an excellent rare choice. I also think we will see at least something big so they can show of their plastic technology.

True, the bolt thrower does seem a bit lame, but it fits and it's something they used to have in the old days.

As for the big thing, I suspect you're right, but I can't really think of anything suitable and I hope they don't add a couple of really out-of-place big things just for the sake of it. I suppose a large version of the grail reliquae might be ok, or a mobile grail chapel?

Sedge
27-10-2010, 15:34
What about a large plastic terrain feature for the army release like a grail chapel or peasants hovel or village. We've had empire terrain and chaos stuff so why not?

saitani
27-10-2010, 15:51
Peopple you know that if we get dismounted questing knights as an option the Monty python inspired armies will increse with 1000%!!

Odin
27-10-2010, 17:16
What about a large plastic terrain feature for the army release like a grail chapel or peasants hovel or village. We've had empire terrain and chaos stuff so why not?

I think it would be great if every new army book had at least one bit of terrain to go with it. A bretonnian grail chapel, a lizardman temple, a Sylvaniam mausoleum etc. Despite the fact that I have both Empire and Chaos armies, I do find the GW scenery to be a bit boring and predictable.

Shield of Freedom
27-10-2010, 19:27
I also think we will see at least something big so they can show of their plastic technology.



As for the big thing, I suspect you're right, but I can't really think of anything suitable and I hope they don't add a couple of really out-of-place big things just for the sake of it. I suppose a large version of the grail reliquae might be ok, or a mobile grail chapel?


I've been saying for a long time, how about the Trebuchet? If they can make a screaming bell/plague furnace that size, why not give us a nice big, properly sized plastic trebuchet? That would be awsome and make a great center piece/backdrop to the formations of knights and peasants arrayed around it.

Awilla the Hun
27-10-2010, 20:37
A plastic trebuchet would be a major improvement, as I know from unpleasant experiences with my own metal one. "No wall can withstand Revolutionary Thought (or trebuchets)! No Trebuchet can withstand contact with air, human hands, or metal glue!"

Also, I don't want to get drawn into a long debate about Imperial vs Bretonnian infantry. However:

-Bretonnian peasants come from generations of chronic malnourishment and inbreeding even worse than that of the Imperial Citizen. This is reflected in their artwork as well as the background. (We see Imperial citizens at least standing tall and having a few teeth left most of the time, anyway.) Such a background does not produce strong soldiers. Farmboys were generally not weak people... but I'm guessing that the Empire also recruits its troops mostly from farmboys, just bigger, stronger ones. I really don't know about the nutritional makeup of Spartan black broth to comment on its effectiveness; but I remember reading somewhere that they were only about 5 feet tall, which is pretty short even by Ancient Greek standards. Training constantly (compared to most other Greek armies being militiamen) probably made up for a lot, however.

-When a Bretonnian nobleman decides that he needs to fortify his estates and defend them, he probably gets his knightly friends together and does some jousting/hunting practice (possibly on some unfortunate serf), or possibly considers the state of his castle, or goes off and purchases some new armour/obtains it on an epic quest. When an Imperial army oficer decides he needs to defend his zone of operations, he trains his men for it, and asks command for some engineers fortify it. That's the difference. The Feudal Knight, in the feudal hierachy, is of the class that defends his people. He trains for it, taxes his peasantry a ridiculous amount for it, and trains vigorously for one on one combat, even going on quests for the Holy Grail to improve his own prowess. The army officer is a professional soldier who, whilst he isn't as good at fighting, knows that he has to use the lower ranking soldiers and all their weaponry, rather than himself and his best friends on a glorified hunting expedition. Of course, I'm oversimplifying the actual medieval way of doing things quite a lot, but so does GW.

-Bretonnia has very little technological advancement. I've heard that the Navy gladly lugs cannons around on its ships; but the army remains staunchly conservative. Why, I don't know. However, having a religion which is opposed to it, and it being a feudal society controlled by martial knights who don't want to have guns anywhere near them (which could blow holes in their magnificent shiny armour) and lived in by backward, uneducated peasants who are far too busy farming or mining to consider anything else, doesn't help.

-Bodkin arrows have no ingame effect for anyone else. Why are Bretonnian longbowmen so special? "Bretonnia" is not "Henry V".

In addition, Psygon, I've been trying to use those rubbish Bretonnian infantry with some success. Results have been mixed, mostly averaging out around losing lots of them in "when the one with the halberd gets killed, the one behind him picks up the halberd and swings" style wave attacks trying to hold the enemy up whilst something else delivers the killing blow, or weakens the enemy enough for the infantry attack. Or they just get ripped up by nasty daemons.


Peopple you know that if we get dismounted questing knights as an option the Monty python inspired armies will increse with 1000%!!

It can increase even more? And besides, those Knights weren't dismounted! Why, they sounded very much like they were on horseback!

The final, non fluff reason why we shouldn't get foot knights or skilled peasants, is that then we'd be just like the Empire, only with inferior fashion sense, better cavalry, and fewer guns. Not Bretonnia, land of glorious knights, dingy castles, and birthplace of the REVOLUTION, COMRADES! URRAH! URRAH! URRAH! LONG LIVE COMRADE VON STAHL! *exits thread*

Hive Fleet Snackin'
27-10-2010, 20:49
Bretonnian peasants come from generations of chronic malnourishment and inbreeding even worse than that of the Imperial Citizen. This is reflected in their artwork as well as the background. (We see Imperial citizens at least standing tall and having a few teeth left most of the time, anyway.) Such a background does not produce strong soldiers. Farmboys were generally not weak people...

The degree to which the weakness of the Bretonnian peasantry has been stressed has varied between Army Book editions.

Though it has absolutely nothing to do with the actual units itself, I'd like to see somewhat of a change away from this notion that Bretonnia is a land of 20 guys sitting around in a castle with a horde of inbred, chromosomally challenged savages clinging to survival outside.

No matter how strong the knight force is, no kingdom could survive logistically if the working and farming classes were so fragile that a strong breeze could do them in. There's no real good reason the peasants need to be so decrepit as to be comedic. If I wanted to play a "ha ha" army, I'd be playing Orcs & Goblins.

What's the point in playing a chivalrous knight protecting his people if the people are so repulsive and unsympathetic?

Also, I'd like to see the Grail Reliquae become something a little more interesting than a lukewarm version of Empire Flagellants.

dragonet111
27-10-2010, 21:26
I like the idea of knights on foot but only for Questing Knight. I imagine those knights leaving their horses outside a cave or an abandoned castle to hunt the beast inside. A skirmisher unit of hunters with some Questing Knight could be fun, probably not really useful but fun (well at least for me:D)

ChaosCajun
28-10-2010, 00:49
1) Make virtues not count against magic item points.
2) Bring back more special characters.
3) Give them Devastating Charge either as a benefit of lance formation or just a knight ability
4) First Charge is a cool idea that would be a great Grail Knight special rule, virtue, and/or change to Banner of the Lady (denying opponent steadfast on the charge).
5) Allow certain knight units (Grail and Questing?) to take unit wide virtues sort of like chaos marks.
6) Give Grail Knights T4
7) Allow ballistae as rare choice.
8) Beef up non-skirmisher bowmen by giving them Great Weapon (large mallets used to drive in the stakes) and allow them to set stakes at any point in the battle rather than moving or shooting that turn (could still stand and shoot if enemy charges in their following turn).
9) Give the bowmen S4 shooting at close range like wood elves, since this should be an innate ability of the longbow.
10) Allow skirmisher bowmen to be scouts (1 unit) and remove limit on the number that can be skirmishers
11) Remove unit size limits for knights.
12) Reduce Silvaron to regular steed.
13) Make the Green Knight's steed a monster and his unit type upgraded to MC
14) Give Men-at-Arms WS3 and heavy armor and add a Peasant Levy with current Men-at-Arms stats
15) Upgrade Reliquae to WS3 and allow army to start game with blessing without having to pray. Give it the ability to endow a nearby peasant unit with the blessing or a virtue(like a warshrine).
16) Add virtue and/or magic item allowing the army to start with blessing without praying.

I am not sold on foot knights, but perhaps you could dismount knight units at 2 infantry for 1 mounted cost of any knight type. Grail, Errant, and RK could have hw/sh, QK would have GW. The blessing could stack with parry ward save.

Psygon
28-10-2010, 05:39
1) Make virtues not count against magic item points.
2) Bring back more special characters.
3) Give them Devastating Charge either as a benefit of lance formation or just a knight ability
4) First Charge is a cool idea that would be a great Grail Knight special rule, virtue, and/or change to Banner of the Lady (denying opponent steadfast on the charge).
5) Allow certain knight units (Grail and Questing?) to take unit wide virtues sort of like chaos marks.
6) Give Grail Knights T4
7) Allow ballistae as rare choice.
8) Beef up non-skirmisher bowmen by giving them Great Weapon (large mallets used to drive in the stakes) and allow them to set stakes at any point in the battle rather than moving or shooting that turn (could still stand and shoot if enemy charges in their following turn).
9) Give the bowmen S4 shooting at close range like wood elves, since this should be an innate ability of the longbow.
10) Allow skirmisher bowmen to be scouts (1 unit) and remove limit on the number that can be skirmishers
11) Remove unit size limits for knights.
12) Reduce Silvaron to regular steed.
13) Make the Green Knight's steed a monster and his unit type upgraded to MC
14) Give Men-at-Arms WS3 and heavy armor and add a Peasant Levy with current Men-at-Arms stats
15) Upgrade Reliquae to WS3 and allow army to start game with blessing without having to pray. Give it the ability to endow a nearby peasant unit with the blessing or a virtue(like a warshrine).
16) Add virtue and/or magic item allowing the army to start with blessing without praying.

I am not sold on foot knights, but perhaps you could dismount knight units at 2 infantry for 1 mounted cost of any knight type. Grail, Errant, and RK could have hw/sh, QK would have GW. The blessing could stack with parry ward save.

7,8,9,14,16 I do not agree with in any way, the biggest offender being number 14. 9 feels like its borrowing something from a book thats already taken too many hits. Yes, I understand the historical impact of the long bow, but they are just peasants shooting with them.

It seems to be a reoccuring theme, that peasants should be better, or at least cheaper, or split into two close combat types, or magically turn into grail knights, or ride flaming bears that get shot from trebuchets only to rampage around the board, or are magically blessed by the Lady (capitalized, mind you) to become vicious cows that wear copious amounts of purple armor and practice all sorts of thaumaturgy and can shoot rainbows out of their eyes.

Anyways, I would like them to be much cheaper and not have the obligatory halberd/spear, and possibly no light armor either. HA/S is what I want, along with a ton of peasants. Sure, Bretonnia shouldn't be a horde army, but you can't do much a ton of horrible troops (damage wise).

My addition: either make Bretonnia more fantastical (in the gigantic, Disney-esque castle fashion with faeries and sprites/spirits [perhaps thats a bit too wood elf-y of an image. Think more Sir Gawain]), or make them more closely resembles 12th century Europe. My vote is for numero uno.

McBaine
28-10-2010, 08:59
-Bretonnian peasants come from generations of chronic malnourishment and inbreeding even worse than that of the Imperial Citizen. This is reflected in their artwork as well as the background.
Yeah, that's the 6th edition book where they made them pay 90% of their stuff to the nobles instead of 10% and made them poor and miserable to a point where the peasants from monty python and the holy grail look well.
In 5th Edition they where just fine.


When a Bretonnian nobleman decides that he needs to fortify his estates and defend them, he probably gets his knightly friends together and does some jousting/hunting practice (possibly on some unfortunate serf), or possibly considers the state of his castle, or goes off and purchases some new armour/obtains it on an epic quest.
Or he assembles his minions, his trained men at arms, like it is stated in the book.


-Bodkin arrows have no ingame effect for anyone else. Why are Bretonnian longbowmen so special? "Bretonnia" is not "Henry V".
I don't know. Every Army has something special. Why does nobody else use Detachements like the empire, or the lance Formation like Bretonnia ? These are balancing questions and ways to distinguish armies. In 5th the Bowmen where so special they had an arrowhead formation where everyone could shoot their bow.
Woodelf bows have S4 on short range... and they don't strike me as specially technological...



The final, non fluff reason why we shouldn't get foot knights or skilled peasants, is that then we'd be just like the Empire, only with inferior fashion sense, better cavalry, and fewer guns. Not Bretonnia, land of glorious knights, dingy castles,

Having foot knights or "skilled" (meaning average) peasants is not the thing that will blurr the line between Empire and Bretonnia. If these things happen, Bretonnia will still be the land of glorious knights and dingy castles.
It's like saying Dwarfs are exactly like Orcs and goblins, they both use bolt throwers.


It seems to be a reoccuring theme, that peasants should be better, or at least cheaper, or split into two close combat types, or magically turn into grail knights, or ride flaming bears that get shot from trebuchets only to rampage around the board, or are magically blessed by the Lady (capitalized, mind you) to become vicious cows that wear copious amounts of purple armor and practice all sorts of thaumaturgy and can shoot rainbows out of their eyes.
You name the biggest offender men at arms with WS3 and an option for heavy armour ?! And how does this average stat relate to all the overdrawn bit you wrote ? WS3 will hardly do any gamebreaking changes. It's the normal human stat for human WS.
So what is the big problem with WS3 and a bit variety in equipment (you mentioned more options yourself, maybe vanilla men at arms and then some armour shiel and weapon options).

Odin
28-10-2010, 12:26
8) Beef up non-skirmisher bowmen by giving them Great Weapon (large mallets used to drive in the stakes) and allow them to set stakes at any point in the battle rather than moving or shooting that turn (could still stand and shoot if enemy charges in their following turn).
9) Give the bowmen S4 shooting at close range like wood elves, since this should be an innate ability of the longbow.
10) Allow skirmisher bowmen to be scouts (1 unit) and remove limit on the number that can be skirmishers

You've gone a bit mad here.

Bowmen don't need beefing up - shooting in two ranks and volley fire has already done that. They are an absolute bargain.

S4 at short range is an ability of the glade guard longbow. Humans don't make longbows anywhere near as well as the elves can.

Psygon
28-10-2010, 21:26
You name the biggest offender men at arms with WS3 and an option for heavy armour ?! WS3 will hardly do any gamebreaking changes. It's the normal human stat for human WS.
So what is the big problem with WS3 and a bit variety in equipment (you mentioned more options yourself, maybe vanilla men at arms and then some armour shiel and weapon options).

You mean its a normal human soldier stat for human weapon skill. Peasants aren't soldiers. They are peasants. A Knight Errant is a professional soldier (in the sense that his profession is fighting and being a noble), and he has weapon skill 3. That makes sense, even though he could be seen as a trainee knight. Would you make the arguement that a peasant can fight as well as a Knight Errant? I certainly wouldn't. You know why? Because a peasant isn't a knight, even though they are both human. Can a farmer fight as well as a hunter? Probably not, because they have differing roles (that example is a bit contrived, but you get the point). (Its a pretty circular arguement, but I have been encouraged by a Doctor of Rhetoric to attempt writing in something other than a linear progresssion).

As for weapon options, have the Grail Pilgrims have heavy armor (i could actually care less if peasants had the options). I want cheap peasants. CHEAP, as in cannon fodder. Hand weapon and shield to start, with dismal skill stats, with options for light armor, halberds, or spears, all for a cost akin to Skaven: dirt cheap.

Synopsis: I want stripped down peasants, so I don't have to pay extra for things I don't want or need, yet there still may be a time where I would wish for some extras,


It seems to be a reoccuring theme, that peasants should be better, or at least cheaper, or split into two close combat types, or magically turn into grail knights, or ride flaming bears that get shot from trebuchets only to rampage around the board, or are magically blessed by the Lady (capitalized, mind you) to become vicious cows that wear copious amounts of purple armor and practice all sorts of thaumaturgy and can shoot rainbows out of their eyes.

And how does this average stat relate to all the overdrawn bit you wrote ?

My overdrawn bit is a satire of the common wishlister (Hey, look at that, its a wishlisting thread...). It really has no relation to weapon skill three besides the fact that my opinion is peasants don't need it (mainly 'cause I don't wish to pay for it), much like many other things "wish" for. Do you really need 7 Corvettes?

Well, thats a bad example.

But the point is, we have different opinions on what is reasonable and what we both wish for. Bretonnia should be a land of very mediocre infantry, and a land of better than average cavalry and heroes.

Since the should makes it a conditional tense: "Only if we are blessed by Games Workshop to see my brilliant ideas be implemented." Thats not very likely, because my ideas aren't all that brilliant.

enygma7
29-10-2010, 00:10
My addition: either make Bretonnia more fantastical (in the gigantic, Disney-esque castle fashion with faeries and sprites/spirits [perhaps thats a bit too wood elf-y of an image. Think more Sir Gawain]), or make them more closely resembles 12th century Europe. My vote is for numero uno.

+1. I'd go for that. The problem I have with human armies in warhammer is they tend to be largely historical with the option of mounting your lord on a flying monster and a few wizards. If I wanted to play historical I'd play warhammer ancients. The new background in the BRB mentions ghostly knights, phantom archers and fay spirits of the land itself. So lets have some of those. How about a rare unit of ghost cavalry that appears in times of greatest need and then mysteriously vanishes to the relief of their allies? What if damsels could come wiht a unit of bodyguarding fay spirits under their control? Not too much to overwhelm the medieval fudal thing, but enough to let you know your playing fantasy.

Other than that: more variety please. Something to make the different knight types materially different in function. I like men at arms sucking (I see them more like the lords hired heavies than trained soldiers - short in both brains and training but able to lay the smack down on peasants who don't pay their tithes). But again, a greater variety of (crap) functionally different infantry would be nice. Monks? I also think Bretonnia *needs* foot knights (maybe not full knights but like actual historical men at arms - heavily armoured and wealthy retainers). This is simply because in the background they are the race most prone to attacking and defending castles, but in game they suck at it because mounted knights are pointless (I wouldn't like to try defending the watchtower scenario with brets!). I'd suggest maces/hammers/morning stars and shields (halberds that allow hand weapon and shield bonus).

I would like to see a ballista but it should be different from a bolt thrower - higher strength (S10, d6 wounds), immobile and maybe with some kind of flaw to make it inferior to a cannon - maybe a limited 90 degree fire arc, pivoting it prevents it shooting that turn?

Anyway, specifics be damned, I want more fantasy and more variety with my bretonnians please!

Psygon
29-10-2010, 02:12
I would like to see a ballista but it should be different from a bolt thrower - higher strength (S10, d6 wounds), immobile and maybe with some kind of flaw to make it inferior to a cannon - maybe a limited 90 degree fire arc, pivoting it prevents it shooting that turn?



One far fetched idea would be using the flame template as the impact area of the shot. The gigantic bolt (and I mean gigantic) would certainly have an impact area that would somewhat match the breathe template, and perhaps the shot would vary d6 inches in either direction. But that seems slightly complicated.

If they do have some sort of ballista (which I am not entirely for), it should be unique in the way it fires and its over all operation.

Sir Charles
29-10-2010, 03:40
Okay, that's 4 grail knight character's, all easily do-able by making them all special character's.

I guess my point was more along the lines of "why does every hero have to have the grail vow when the grail is so rare?".

I didn't say I was totally against the idea anyway.Wait, so you have a problem with grail knights as characters because that means there are just to many of them, but entire units of them running around is alright?

Personally I'm just going to repeat the call I make every edition for them to get rid of Grail Knights as a unit and make them a tough combat focused lord choice.

Charistoph
29-10-2010, 06:36
You mean its a normal human soldier stat for human weapon skill. Peasants aren't soldiers. They are peasants. A Knight Errant is a professional soldier (in the sense that his profession is fighting and being a noble), and he has weapon skill 3. That makes sense, even though he could be seen as a trainee knight. Would you make the arguement that a peasant can fight as well as a Knight Errant? I certainly wouldn't. You know why? Because a peasant isn't a knight, even though they are both human. Can a farmer fight as well as a hunter? Probably not, because they have differing roles (that example is a bit contrived, but you get the point). (Its a pretty circular arguement, but I have been encouraged by a Doctor of Rhetoric to attempt writing in something other than a linear progresssion).

Um, Men @ Arms ARE soldiers, not just peasant levies. True, they don't have the exact same training as an Empire Swordsman, but they aren't the farmers storming a castle with their pitchforks, either.


As for weapon options, have the Grail Pilgrims have heavy armor (i could actually care less if peasants had the options). I want cheap peasants. CHEAP, as in cannon fodder. Hand weapon and shield to start, with dismal skill stats, with options for light armor, halberds, or spears, all for a cost akin to Skaven: dirt cheap.

First you want M@A not to be soldiers, then you want Grail Pilgrims to be heavy infantry? Talk about a double standard. If anything, the Pilgrims are more Peasant than the M@A, just fanatical.

Schmapdi
29-10-2010, 08:05
Didn't read everything - so sorry if I repeat already mentioned ideas.

First - I don't want to see more foot units (grail pilgrims are awesome! Who needs unmounted knights?) or warmachines, this isn't the empire! Here's a short list of my preferred changes. For brevity's sake, assume existing crappy units are made better and OP stuff is toned down.

1. Drop Yeoman.
2. New Core choice - Squires. Unmounted Knights-to-be that can act as unit upgrades for Men at Arms and Peasant bowmen. Say you can get up to 5 per unit, and they have better stats/armour than the peasants, and in order to keep them from being wiped out immediately they can roll and have a 1/3 chance or so of parrying a wound and deflecting it onto a peasant instead.
3. New Special Choice - Brettonian Hunting Party - Fast Calv Nobles armed with xbows, lances. Can wittlea unit down with shooting and maybe break it on the charge - better armour than most light calv, but still low. Mixed in with the unit Hunting Mastiffs - large hunting dogs than can chase down fleeing enemies, add extra melee attacks, tie up weak units in melee. Unit can shoot at enemy units tied up by dogs w/o fear of hitting the dogs.
4. Green Knight - becomes a rare unit.
5. Some sort of warshrine/grail - mounted on wheels, pulled by Knights of the realm - a quasi-chariot/corpse cart sort of thing. A defensive boon for knights, maybe a rallying point too? Perhaps a variant that would act as a magical mortar too? Smiting enemies via a magical mirror or something.

The above, plus maybe a new character or two would make me happy while preserving Brets flavor and keep it an almost entirely mounted army.

McBaine
29-10-2010, 10:05
You mean its a normal human soldier stat for human weapon skill. Peasants aren't soldiers. They are peasants. A Knight Errant is a professional soldier (in the sense that his profession is fighting and being a noble), and he has weapon skill 3. That makes sense, even though he could be seen as a trainee knight. Would you make the arguement that a peasant can fight as well as a Knight Errant? I certainly wouldn't. You know why? Because a peasant isn't a knight, even though they are both human. Can a farmer fight as well as a hunter? Probably not, because they have differing roles (that example is a bit contrived, but you get the point). (Its a pretty circular arguement, but I have been encouraged by a Doctor of Rhetoric to attempt writing in something other than a linear progresssion).

No, it's pretty much the human average. I read through the empire book. spearmen are trained soldiers. Militia are not. It even states that militia are recruited (willingly or not). It says: "Some of these troops will be grim mercenaries or Men used to live by the strength of their sword, while others will be peasants levied from the local countryside".
So the militia also has (unwillingly recruited) peasants in it. Guess what ? milita and spearmen both have WS3.
An untrained Knight (Errant) also has WS3. A trained one is a knight of the realm, a veteran, and has WS4.
I say WS3 is average, WS4 is trained and battle hardened - for humans anyway. In an abstract system like the profile system there are just not enough nuances to divert mercenaries and peasants, so they just go with the average. The bretonnian Men at Arms should have the same.


It really has no relation to weapon skill three besides the fact that my opinion is peasants don't need it (mainly 'cause I don't wish to pay for it),
Therfore my suggestion was make a unit of peasant rabble with no options altogether. But even with WS3 the Ment at Arms should not cost so much.


Personally I'm just going to repeat the call I make every edition for them to get rid of Grail Knights as a unit and make them a tough combat focused lord choice.

This is not happening. it would be desasterous. We have very few choices already. Taking away the one good (0-1 rare choice) unit we have is balance wise just stupid. Fluff wise I already pointed out that Grail knights are not that rare.


Some sort of warshrine/grail - mounted on wheels, pulled by Knights of the realm - a quasi-chariot/corpse cart sort of thing. A defensive boon for knights, maybe a rallying point too? Perhaps a variant that would act as a magical mortar too? Smiting enemies via a magical mirror or something.
would such rules not be good for a revamp of the grail reliquie ? Knights should not pull wagons around. They should charge the enemy. Let the peasants carry it.

Haravikk
29-10-2010, 12:28
Here's some brainstorming from me:


Vows:

Knight's Vow - units with peasant's duty may use knight's leadership. Knights are immune to panic caused by units with peasant's duty.
Questing Vow - as above, plus immune to panic, fear, and terror.
Grail Vow - as above, plus stubborn. Additionally, units with 12" of a unit or character with this vow count their ranks twice when determining Steadfast.

Peasant Warriors - current men-at-arms stats, have swords and shields, can have light armour.
Men-at-arms - empire state-troop stats, light armour, swords and shields. May upgrade to heavy armour, and may purchase spears.
Knights Errant - slightly cheaper, but less predictable; must charge units of monstrous infantry, or unit containing character(s). Other units will be charged if knights fail a leadership test (as per Frenzy minus the extra attack), represents them seeking glory or being foolhardy.
Questing Knights - great weapons, ignore always strikes last on the charge.
Grail Knights - devastating charge, all other knight units that charge the same target will also gain devastating charge, making a combined charge extremely dangerous.


Just some ideas. I kind of like the idea in my head of grail knights bolstering other units into a cavalry charge to be truly feared, while questing knights are just consistently heavy-hitters, but no longer penalised by the initiative order change that currently makes them quite hard to use properly.

Psygon
29-10-2010, 18:49
No, it's pretty much the human average. I read through the empire book. spearmen are trained soldiers. Militia are not. It even states that militia are recruited (willingly or not). It says: "Some of these troops will be grim mercenaries or Men used to live by the strength of their sword, while others will be peasants levied from the local countryside".
So the militia also has (unwillingly recruited) peasants in it. Guess what ? milita and spearmen both have WS3.
An untrained Knight (Errant) also has WS3. A trained one is a knight of the realm, a veteran, and has WS4.
I say WS3 is average, WS4 is trained and battle hardened - for humans anyway. In an abstract system like the profile system there are just not enough nuances to divert mercenaries and peasants, so they just go with the average. The bretonnian Men at Arms should have the same.



I concede the point on the topic of weapon skill.

But if I had to choose between peasant "rabble" and Men at Arms making the cut into the book, I think it would be peasant rabble.


First you want M@A not to be soldiers, then you want Grail Pilgrims to be heavy infantry? Talk about a double standard. If anything, the Pilgrims are more Peasant than the M@A, just fanatical.

My apologises, my badly written sentence did not convey its intended meaning. IF there were to be peasants with heavy armor, I feel that it would be more proper to include them in the special section (whatever it would be, possibly not Grail Pilgrims) rather than make them available for a peasant core choice. It was an unexplained hypothetical statement.

Isha blessed
29-10-2010, 19:03
Making Grail Knights a monsterous cavalry, would make the knights different, and add fit the idea of them been uber knights


I like that idea too


No, it would make them "normal" Knights who ride monstrous beasts. Being monstrous cavalry has nothing to do with the rider, but with the mount.
At best they would be knights on uber mounts.


This is thinking sooooo inside "the box" I had to say -inside the box- Is the steam tank really a chariot? Are the high elf archers that much faster and better trained than the black guard? Do all the creatures suffering from stupidity have an IQ of 40? No.

The steam tank follows the rules of a chariot because it is most fitting set of rules. The High elf excuse for having ASF is a mix of training and team work. Many characters can get stupidity, not because they are "dull of mind" but because they have other voices or visions.

If you want a troop type to have all the cavalry rules, plus stomp, plus monstrous ranks and support. call them monstrous cavalry and have a blurb about why they function that way. If you hate stomp and can't get over the label, just give them monstrous ranks and support.

I like the Idea earlier, of them all being like monstrous cav (however you want to word it). But instead of giving them all devastating charge and a price hike, I would go with only the grail knights getting devastating charge and boost the questing knights to near grail knight stats... and initiative 4 on KotR

It wouldn't do the KotR any favors but it would be great for the questing knights... and be crazy grail knights!

Sir Charles
29-10-2010, 22:27
This is not happening. it would be desasterous. We have very few choices already. Taking away the one good (0-1 rare choice) unit we have is balance wise just stupid. Fluff wise I already pointed out that Grail knights are not that rare.Then improve questing knights so they can take the current role of GK. GK might not be that rare, although frankly I would say that there is some background to say they are look at the Knight Errant book you have a fairly large army drawing from a large area and not only does this large gathering only draw one GK the fact that one showed up at all was a big deal, but they are that powerful. Look at the KE book again one GK takes out about 2 giants practically on his own and in the sequel the same GK holds his own against a high level Chaos Champion until the champion called on demonic help. In the WHRP2 rules a GK is close to being on par with Exalted Chaos Champions. Heck the descriptions of them in the Armybook has them doing things such as slaying undead with their mere presence.

Makrar
29-10-2010, 23:32
I would increase questing to around current grail knight levels and buff grail knights into a unit of heroes. but remove the option of a grail vow for a paladin. Each knight could have 30 pts wargear options and options for different weapons and the grail vow could be suitably unique to make the unit interesting. I would make grail knights kick the crap out of blood knights but cost a ton

Could also allow the knights to break up and act indenpendantly such as joining units or so forth.

I think there needs to be more granularity within the different units of knights.

uona
29-10-2010, 23:35
This is not happening. it would be desasterous. We have very few choices already. Taking away the one good (0-1 rare choice) unit we have is balance wise just stupid. Fluff wise I already pointed out that Grail knights are not that rare.



In the brettonian novels (the two ive read) there was exactly one grail knight in a prolonged campaign involving chaos laying waste to one dukedom. The majority of the armies of two dukedoms were involved in the fight as well as minor contigents from the rest of brettonia, not to mention the fact that the matter drew the attention of the fey enchantress herself.

Easily thousands upon thousands of knights and of course we all know that a tabletop regiment of 15 kotr would be something like 100 or more in fiction and again there was exactly one grail knight.... for the entire armies of two dukedoms.... not to mention if anyone could call on more grails it would be the fey enchantress (more than king leuon i think).

So short answer is yes grails are rare. I doubt there would be enough to fill one regiment if you called up all the grails in brettonia.

Zaonite
30-10-2010, 00:51
They may, or may not change Grail Knights. If they do I only envisage an increase in T to 4 or an improved ward save.

Changing them to the Heroes of the Bretonni as they are portrayed in the books would be counter productive for GW's wallet. They will simpley be buffed so they sell more of them.
(sorry for pissing on everyones chips)

I would love to see GK as one model regiments. Each able to go toe-to-toe with a Chaos Lord. It'd be sooooo coool.

Psygon
30-10-2010, 06:49
They may, or may not change Grail Knights. If they do I only envisage an increase in T to 4 or an improved ward save.

Changing them to the Heroes of the Bretonni as they are portrayed in the books would be counter productive for GW's wallet. They will simpley be buffed so they sell more of them.
(sorry for pissing on everyones chips)

I would love to see GK as one model regiments. Each able to go toe-to-toe with a Chaos Lord. It'd be sooooo coool.

I love pissed-on chips. It adds something in the end.

In otherwords, (some) people say Grail Knights should more or less be the Doombull of Bretonnia. It could work, just as long as he is as awesome as anything, ever. :skull:

McBaine
30-10-2010, 09:00
GK might not be that rare, although frankly I would say that there is some background to say they are look at the Knight Errant book you have a fairly large army drawing from a large area and not only does this large gathering only draw one GK the fact that one showed up at all was a big deal, but they are that powerful. Look at the KE book again one GK takes out about 2 giants practically on his own and in the sequel the same GK holds his own against a high level Chaos Champion until the champion called on demonic help. In the WHRP2 rules a GK is close to being on par with Exalted Chaos Champions.
Heck the descriptions of them in the Armybook has them doing things such as slaying undead with their mere presence.


In the brettonian novels (the two ive read) there was exactly one grail knight in a prolonged campaign involving chaos laying waste to one dukedom. The majority of the armies of two dukedoms were involved in the fight as well as minor contigents from the rest of brettonia, not to mention the fact that the matter drew the attention of the fey enchantress herself.

1) The fluff of the books are only half official. As far as I know nothing of this ever makes it into fluff of the army books or is even mentioned.
2) There is a perfectly good reason for only one grail knight present. It is the authors joice. If he had a whole unit of grail knights, this character had a hard time shining. By making him the only grail knight, he is instantly recognisable (because he is by his definition recognisable over all the other kinds of knights) and it is easyer to build him up as a character.
3) Do you think this character is a rank and file grail knight ? He slays two giants and fights on par with chaos generals. Sounds to me like a hero or Lord with the grail vow and the right virtue for slaying big monsters. Not every grail knight is enourmous powerful to this extend. Some are, but not all of them. The slaying undead with their mere precense thing ? Yeah, there was a special char named Sir Almaric in a WD a couple of years back with that ability.
4) Of course the fluff states that they are the best. Of course every peasant and even knights will fuel the legends of the grail knights. Look at the vampire counts book. The fluff of the Blood Knights also says they are the best. As does the fluff of the Chaoswarriors. Army books tend to do that. An unit sells better if you describe them as battle hardened near undefeatable warriors, not as the special choice with mediocre stats or whatever.


Then improve questing knights so they can take the current role of GK.
I just would hate to lose a knight unit who does good...
What we need is more variation, more units. Just changing a unit doesn't give us more variety. It replaces one kind of unit with another. I love the grail knights in units. Even if the Questing knights could fulfil the role, then the role of the questing knights had to be filled.
I don't think this is the right thing to to. Add more units instead of replacing them.

theJ
30-10-2010, 10:51
@McBaine:
Add more units?
We've tried.
We've been talking of dismounted knights. We've been talking of ballistae. We've been talking of ghostly/spiritual/ethereal knights. There's been talk of making the grail knights some truly unique characters as opposed to just another bunch of knights (powerful ones or not). There's been talk of splitting the men-at-arms into "rabble" and "trained soldier" categories.
The problem here ain't that we don't come up with fitting units, it's that every time we do, people start whining about it being "unfitting", despite them all (most) being mentioned in the fluff over and over -.-

Personally, I'm gonna have to say we need to take a realistic look at the whole thing.
The Brettonians are based on the mythos and legends surrounding the middle ages. These mythos may be centered around the glorious knights, but in order for said knights to be as glorious as they're supposed to be, they need some standard soldiers to compare them to.
We've got plenty of inspiration to pick and choose from. We've got the entire armies of the middle ages for the lady's sake!
We've got foot soldiers both in the guise of peasant levies/rabble and trained, proffesional soldiers (men-at-arms).
We've got archers - an idea that immediately springs to mind is to split these into peasant archers and also have a unique, elite group, which mimics the robin hood saga (or have a robin hood esque character that turns any unit of archers he joins into a more skilled unit).
We've got some limited siege in the form of the trebuchet - which is a fair bit different from what any of the other factions have.
We've got a plethora of knights, on foot, mounted, mounted on mythical creatures (pegasii), carrying a load of different weapons, ranging from swords and axes, to polearms (yes, the medieval knights LOVED their polearms), to maces and flails, to the great zweihenders of the germans, to the hunting spears of the spanish, to the good ol' classic lance of every knight ever.

Are you guys seriously telling me this ain't enough to build a proper, varied army around?
I refuse to believe that.

P.S. Sorry if I sound a bit aggressive at times, I tend to get a bit passionate whenever I open my mouth :p Or pick up a pen... or when my fingers touch a keyboard... ach, screw it, I'm always passionate ^^

uona
30-10-2010, 17:33
some other things id like to see

1. more alternative mounts- now as far back as two army books ago it was unthinkable to have knightly regiments without the brettonian warhorse but with the introduction of pegasus knights the door has been left open. Some mounts could be unicorns (maybe a little bit of mr? or the horse has a stronger charge attack like more than the knight) fluffwise could be tied to quelleness. You could have some sea type creature as a mount tied to whichever province has the trident for the shield. You could even tie it to maybe specific monastaries or maybe orders of knights. One wild idea I had was a few knights saving dwrvs and being gifted with mechanical horses and then growing the order while being supplied by dwarves and having to help them in time of need.

2. Failed questing knights- Now regardless of wheter you think there are 10 grail knights, 100, 1000 or tens of thousands of them in brettonia the fact is that not every questing knight succeeds in the grail quest. Now of course most of those who fail get eaten by bears or something but i was thinking about either a knightly unit or special character who has succedded every martial challenge thrown at them/him but for some reason (probably spiritual) cant find the grail. So they either make an excuse to give up the grail quest (i.e. i saw the lady in a vision and she said it was not meant for me) or have their old obligations overtake them. I think it would be an interesting unit/ or character.

3. something from mousillon- Maybe a "black knight" regiment from there? I remember reading something about them somewhere. An idea I had was that they never start with the ladies blessing under any circumstance but get it the first time they break a unit or some other event. Basically a "redemption" themed unit.

4. Bard- There was an old sc like this I forgot his name. He sang songs every turn to buff nearby units. Functionally it would probably be like karvolo from wm. I actually think its very fluffy for bretts to have them. Maybe a hero level choice?

5. Monstrous avatar- ok this one I have no fluff basis for but something that strikes me as belonging to a brettonia tied tightly to the lady. Maybe a monstrous creature that is basically a huge knight in shining armor. Basically the soul of one of the heroes brought to avalon that the lady sends out for the fight. A rare choice along the lines of giants, hydras, etc.

Sir Charles
30-10-2010, 18:53
2) There is a perfectly good reason for only one grail knight present. It is the authors joice. If he had a whole unit of grail knights, this character had a hard time shining. By making him the only grail knight, he is instantly recognisable (because he is by his definition recognisable over all the other kinds of knights) and it is easier to build him up as a character. The Grail Knight was not the main character of these books, he was maybe a mentor to that character, but he could have played that role even with the inclusion of other GK.

3) Do you think this character is a rank and file grail knight ? He slays two giants and fights on par with chaos generals. Sounds to me like a hero or Lord with the grail vow and the right virtue for slaying big monsters. Not every grail knight is enourmous powerful to this extend. Some are, but not all of them. The slaying undead with their mere precense thing ? Yeah, there was a special char named Sir Almaric in a WD a couple of years back with that ability.I don't think there is any such thing as a rank and file Grail Knights. There is certainly nothing in the background to support the idea as every description of them we get has them as rather high level heroes. The only thing that has them as a rank and file is the army list itself. Hence why I want the army list to change to better reflect the epic stuff they are shown doing in the background, which I don't think they can do in a balanced way if they are kept as a unit. Further this isn't losing a unit it is gaining a character choice and heroic characters are what Bretonnia is all about.

KalEf
30-10-2010, 20:50
some other things id like to see

1. more alternative mounts-

2. Failed questing knights-

3. something from mousillon-

4. Bard-

5. Monstrous avatar-

I like trading with the dwarfs. I personally would like to see the next story arch be: Ling Louie gets fet-up with acheaon, has the dwarves make armor for him and beaquis plus a special sheath, quests for the fell blade, goes up there to show Archy who's boss, and then starts to age normally.

TBH though, I am not a fan of the mechanical steed for the brets.

I however DO like the bard Idea, the redemption unit, and the failed questing knight idea.

On the monstrous avatar idea... This forum is making it sound like the grail knights might be headed there any way.

so stealing from all over this forum they could go
-Monstrous support and monstrous ranks-
-blessing as is, plus magical attacks-
-bret master work lances (+2st and +2in on charge) for everyone but errant and questing-

KE -21- core
boost up to ws4 (even the empire basic core knights have this)

KotR -same price- core
boost to In4
option to boost up to ST4 for +3points

QK -30- (compare to Dragon princes) special
+1 attack

Failed questing -33- (dragon princes + inner circle) special, maybe rare
As grail now, but no auto blessing.

Grail knight -150?- rare
Paladin stats but WS6 and LD10
a blurb about how it affects the horse eg his mount is a Pegasus without flight.
unbreakable
Always blessed
Glorious radiance: any time a model hits the grail knight in close combat it must take a leadership test on it's own unmodified LD. If passed, roll to wound as normal. If failed, the attack is lost.
Plus upgrade options like
the model has devastating charge/ heroic killing blow, Enemy models within 6" must reroll successful LD tests, If forces of destruction fail the Glorious radiance LD check they take a wound (no armor), 4+ward, etc

musical
30-10-2010, 21:14
How about an additional rule:

Chauvinism

In any combat involving knights and Damsels or Prophetesses, a character with knight's vow must always issue or accept challenges when possible. In addition a character with knight's vow must always accept challenges from an enemy female character, but cannot issue a challenge against enemy female characters.

Kisanis
30-10-2010, 23:02
@McBaine:
Add more units?
We've tried.
We've been talking of dismounted knights. We've been talking of ballistae. We've been talking of ghostly/spiritual/ethereal knights. There's been talk of making the grail knights some truly unique characters as opposed to just another bunch of knights (powerful ones or not). There's been talk of splitting the men-at-arms into "rabble" and "trained soldier" categories.
The problem here ain't that we don't come up with fitting units, it's that every time we do, people start whining about it being "unfitting", despite them all (most) being mentioned in the fluff over and over -.-

Personally, I'm gonna have to say we need to take a realistic look at the whole thing.
The Brettonians are based on the mythos and legends surrounding the middle ages. These mythos may be centered around the glorious knights, but in order for said knights to be as glorious as they're supposed to be, they need some standard soldiers to compare them to.
We've got plenty of inspiration to pick and choose from. We've got the entire armies of the middle ages for the lady's sake!
We've got foot soldiers both in the guise of peasant levies/rabble and trained, proffesional soldiers (men-at-arms).
We've got archers - an idea that immediately springs to mind is to split these into peasant archers and also have a unique, elite group, which mimics the robin hood saga (or have a robin hood esque character that turns any unit of archers he joins into a more skilled unit).
We've got some limited siege in the form of the trebuchet - which is a fair bit different from what any of the other factions have.
We've got a plethora of knights, on foot, mounted, mounted on mythical creatures (pegasii), carrying a load of different weapons, ranging from swords and axes, to polearms (yes, the medieval knights LOVED their polearms), to maces and flails, to the great zweihenders of the germans, to the hunting spears of the spanish, to the good ol' classic lance of every knight ever.

Are you guys seriously telling me this ain't enough to build a proper, varied army around?
I refuse to believe that.

P.S. Sorry if I sound a bit aggressive at times, I tend to get a bit passionate whenever I open my mouth :p Or pick up a pen... or when my fingers touch a keyboard... ach, screw it, I'm always passionate ^^


I don't think the problem is really about the army looking varied, its about it functioning in a varied way. Brets have a lot of variation but its not competitive. They can look fantastic... and play blandly (or terribly).

Its just frustrating that from the Arthur romances, 14th century england, Crusades, etc... as a starting point for fluff and character, they can be so limited in choice.

They *Could* have so much more (as this shows) and GW Could be selling so much more! (as this shows!)

I really do think that Heavy Infantry choice with heavy armour works. But you could tie it into the number of Knight characters you have (Ie. non bodyguard bodyguards. Historical M@A).

I think squires, archers, and KOTR are ok as is (just some points tweaking perhaps)

I still say the reliquae is a great idea with terrible execution, it just... lacks that extra 10% to make it a worthwhile unit.

enygma7
30-10-2010, 23:11
4. Bard

Not a huge fan of many of the ideas you put forward but this I do like. I'd see it as a hero that functions a bit like a chaos war shrine or a couldron of blood. Each turn he can sing a different ballard which buffs the knights egos and gives them a virtue or ability. E.g. immune to psych, because its hard to run away when the dude next to you is singing a song about how brave you are :) Its both fluffy, unique and suitably pythonesque without being too absurd:)

Psygon
30-10-2010, 23:39
5. Monstrous avatar- ok this one I have no fluff basis for but something that strikes me as belonging to a brettonia tied tightly to the lady. Maybe a monstrous creature that is basically a huge knight in shining armor. Basically the soul of one of the heroes brought to avalon that the lady sends out for the fight. A rare choice along the lines of giants, hydras, etc.

Some reason that struck me as an incredibly awesome idea, if executed correctly. Souls of dead kings, perhaps? Sheesh, a Gorgon with a +2 armor save and weapon options :D.

It would have to be expensive as... something really expensive, but if they made an incredible model for such an item, I would field it 90% of the time just because of how awesome it would be.

As for fitting the fluff... well, fluff can be re-written, that has happened before.

As for a function in the army... that one I am not quite sure how to answer.


Chauvinism

In any combat involving knights and Damsels or Prophetesses, a character with knight's vow must always issue or accept challenges when possible. In addition a character with knight's vow must always accept challenges from an enemy female character, but cannot issue a challenge against enemy female characters.

It made me laugh in a non-politically correct way, but how many female characters are there out there that aren't spell casters, besides the Death Hag?

Zaonite
30-10-2010, 23:39
Not a huge fan of many of the ideas you put forward but this I do like. I'd see it as a hero that functions a bit like a chaos war shrine or a couldron of blood. Each turn he can sing a different ballard which buffs the knights egos and gives them a virtue or ability. E.g. immune to psych, because its hard to run away when the dude next to you is singing a song about how brave you are :) Its both fluffy, unique and suitably pythonesque without being too absurd:)

The Bard had amazing rules and as enygma says, very fluffy.
I for one would like a return to the old fluff and special characters.

Skjoldr
31-10-2010, 00:36
One thing i'd like to see is the Faceless and Herrimault from the WFRP Bretonnian book. Perhaps the Faceless could be a Hero-level character that allows you to take a unit of Herrimault? Like, for example:

Faceless: 55 points
WS: 4
BS: 5
S: 4
T: 4
W: 2
I: 6
LD: 9

Equipment: Light Armor, Longbow, Hand Weapon
May Take: Additional Hand Weapon, Great Weapon, Bodkin Arrows (Armor Piercing)
50 point magic item allowance, no vows

Special Rules:
Outlaw: Only the Faceless' personal Herrimault unit may use his leadership. He may never be the army general.

Herrimault:
WS: 3
BS: 4
S: 3
T: 3
W: 1
I: 4
LD: 7

Equipment: Longbow, Two Hand Weapons, Light Armor
May Purchase: Bodkin Arrows (Armor Piercing), Braziers

Special Rules:
Ambush
Skirmish
Scouts (If you choose not to ambush, obviously)
Hunted: Herrimault are despised by Bretonnian nobility. While they hold many of the same goals, especially when the defense of Bretonnia is at stake, any unit of Herrimault will immediately fade back into the shadows once the fighting is over, before the Knights can hunt them down. Herrmault always count as having been killed during the battle when victory points are calculated.

Charistoph
31-10-2010, 00:48
How about an additional rule:

Chauvinism

In any combat involving knights and Damsels or Prophetesses, a character with knight's vow must always issue or accept challenges when possible. In addition a character with knight's vow must always accept challenges from an enemy female character, but cannot issue a challenge against enemy female characters.

So... nerf their current rules regarding challenges, is that what you're saying?

Funny, though.

Psygon
31-10-2010, 05:21
One potential rule I would like to see would be that the Bretonnian battle standard counts as being a large target for purposes of the "Hold Your Ground" rule.

On that same note, what does the world think of a Lord level BSB? Of course, it would have something to make it worthwhile to take it over a regular BSB (besides being more resilient). Of what that would be, I am not really certain.

theJ
31-10-2010, 10:08
How about an additional rule:

Chauvinism

In any combat involving knights and Damsels or Prophetesses, a character with knight's vow must always issue or accept challenges when possible. In addition a character with knight's vow must always accept challenges from an enemy female character, but cannot issue a challenge against enemy female characters.

Add a line about Damsels and Prophetesses being unable to issue or accept challenges while any models with the Knight's Vow remains in the unit and I'm fine with it :)

dragonet111
31-10-2010, 22:36
I would like to see tons of virtues, virtues like Master Swordsman that could grant piercing strike....

Leogun_91
31-10-2010, 23:06
It made me laugh in a non-politically correct way, but how many female characters are there out there that aren't spell casters, besides the Death Hag?Most character choices aren't bound by gender and we don't have many female special characters at all. For non magic user SCs we have the sisters of Twilight from Woodelfs(that's two characters but one choice so I'll count them as two and in fairness will do the same with Vilitch the Curseling if we are to compare the genders),Drycha, Crone Hellebron, Valkia and The Masque.
For magical SCs we have The Fey Enchantress, Isabella von Carstein (she is hardly a pure magic user but she is a wizard and she isn't too useful in combat) and Morathi. (We used to have Katarin the Ice queen too)

Psygon
01-11-2010, 03:12
Most character choices aren't bound by gender and we don't have many female special characters at all. For non magic user SCs we have the sisters of Twilight from Woodelfs(that's two characters but one choice so I'll count them as two and in fairness will do the same with Vilitch the Curseling if we are to compare the genders),Drycha, Crone Hellebron, Valkia and The Masque.
For magical SCs we have The Fey Enchantress, Isabella von Carstein (she is hardly a pure magic user but she is a wizard and she isn't too useful in combat) and Morathi. (We used to have Katarin the Ice queen too)

So, if one were to buy Games Workshop generic character models, there wouldn't be many at all, and even if someone did model their characters to be female, there still wouldn't be very many.

H33D
01-11-2010, 07:50
A 'unique' type hero such as an archer-type hero, would fill the same role an engineer would in another army. Must be placed in an archer unit, upgrades their BS +1, other special abilities.

Man-at-Arms have more weapon options: spear, halberd, great weapon, shield, extra hand weapon, light armor. Make them have more of a peasant look to them as well. Probably a point cheaper.

Just give knights errant frenzy and ignore all of the other weird rules. Same thing except +1 attack all the time.

Questing Knights can scout, and/or be on foot.

A Templar Knight unit of priests that guard the inner chambers of religious or royal buildings. Same stat as a Grail Knight but stubborn and no horses. 2 points more than a Questing Knight on foot.

Grail Knights gain unbreakable on the charge only.

All Knights on horses gain +1 additional CR for charging.

Allow 'look out-sir' rolls for Pegasus characters on a Royal Pegasus when near/inside a unit of Pegasus knights. Also allow Pegasus characters to join a unit of Pegasus knights.

Sir_Glonojad
01-11-2010, 09:02
I just can't see archer heroes. That would be peasant revolution leaders and I dare doubt knights would see that happen - good knights would try to have their peasants relatively happy, evil knights would just slay all potential peasant leaders.

As for men-at-arms: I really would like them to return to WS3 stat. They are currently a unit that could represent either standing levies or peasant rabble - an unfortunate mingling that was a result of the cancellation of the idea of peasants as a unit. So I'd like to first and foremost separate semi-professional M@A (WS3, Ld6) from peasant rabble (WS2, Ld4). I don't think they need a more peasant look, though I dislike their models wholeheartedly. Oh, the times of 5ed Perry models...

I also am not very thrilled with the whole battle-pilgrim unit idea, and the reliquary is for me simply disgusting. I'd much prefer the unit to shift in to a monk/hermit unit, with the reliquary turned into something less necromantic, something inspired by Catholic processions (i.e. a priest with a holy symbol - a grail or an altar under a "tent").

As for new units - it is difficult to foresee anything else than the obvious foot knights. We can be sure however that, should GW decide that an extra unit is needed, the fluff will be accordingly expanded. Whoever heard of "lion chariots" before the 7th Edition High Elf book?

Also, Bretonnian chivalry is a natural supply for powerful heroes, so I agree that Bretonnian characters could be a little more powerful than Imperial, especially the ones with the Grail Virtue. I'd also like to see a separate Cavalier hero to take place of the current Paladin and switch Paladin into someone more spiritual and limited in numbers - not unlike the high-fantasy DnD Paladin in fact. A 30-40% allowance for heroes wouldn't also be bad.

Shazzam6
01-11-2010, 18:01
Long time troll, bretonnian player... I have to say that the army lacks in quite a few aspects so for realistic wishlisting, I would like to see a few things:
- the template explosions from misscasts should be considered magic missles and should allow MR to factor in (major buff for bretonnian against offensive misscast armies, which erase 200pts worth of GK on a cast)
- call me old-school, but the whole relationship between peasant and knight's vow was for peasant to provide shields v shooting and charging, run, not panic knights, and expose enemy to counter-charge. Now that that is out of the window, I would like to see a bit more tactical use for peasants: something like a human shield (I know, I am a tyrant).
- Some useful arcane items. Magic mirror, chalice, all good defensive items, but I would like to see something more offensive. I love the idea of naked ladies as much as the next guy, but I want to have a choice of items for my ladies.
- I hate the idea of questing knights on foot (or any knights), but 8th Ed demands at least a normal infantry unit, so how about Pilgrims on a Holy quest (something like relique), armed with Morning stars, shields, can benefit from blessing, light armor, WS3 S4 and a blinding presence rule (enemies suffer -1 to hit), stubbern near models with grail vow
- Grail Vow adds 1ld to the model

Let me know what you guys think. I really want to put some emphasis on the Grail Vow as something worth purchasing on anyone.

Snake1311
01-11-2010, 19:07
Any buffs to the bretonnian magic offense means more dwellers...if you get MR against miscasts, and have arcan items givng you more powerdice, there is very little reason not to cast it on 6 dice every magic phase. I think the way forward with bretonnian 'magic' would be something allowing for flat buffs ala sigmarite priests / cauldron of blood.

Charistoph
01-11-2010, 23:14
- call me old-school, but the whole relationship between peasant and knight's vow was for peasant to provide shields v shooting and charging, run, not panic knights, and expose enemy to counter-charge. Now that that is out of the window, I would like to see a bit more tactical use for peasants: something like a human shield (I know, I am a tyrant).

I'm unclear how this has really changed. If anything, the Peasants are needed for this more than ever.


- I hate the idea of questing knights on foot (or any knights), but 8th Ed demands at least a normal infantry unit, so how about Pilgrims on a Holy quest (something like relique), armed with Morning stars, shields, can benefit from blessing, light armor, WS3 S4 and a blinding presence rule (enemies suffer -1 to hit), stubbern near models with grail vow

I'm a fan of foot knights. There aren't many armies that field infantry in Heavy Armor and Shields. Aside from Saurus and Dwarfs, they either carry a special weapon and/or wear Plate. It's mostly a matter of taste, though.

I disagree with the Pilgrims, though. They should be untrained Peasants, and not better than the M@A, just more Fanatical. Morning Stars are a nice touch, though, and should be more prevalent throughout the army.


- Grail Vow adds 1ld to the model.

I like this for characters. It adds to their fluff of being inspiring beings.

Hive Fleet Snackin'
02-11-2010, 10:15
I'm unclear how this has really changed. If anything, the Peasants are needed for this more than ever.



I would wager that by shooting he's referring to changes in true LoS... as for the rest, I don't quite know what's changed, either.

Peasants becoming steadfast within 6" of a knight unit would be something, wouldn't it? I'd love to have more 20-25 man blocks to throw around than try and logistically cram two or more hordes (real hordes and just big unit hordes) into my deployment zone.

Psygon
02-11-2010, 22:03
Peasants becoming steadfast within 6" of a knight unit would be something, wouldn't it? I'd love to have more 20-25 man blocks to throw around than try and logistically cram two or more hordes (real hordes and just big unit hordes) into my deployment zone.


- call me old-school, but the whole relationship between peasant and knight's vow was for peasant to provide shields v shooting and charging, run, not panic knights, and expose enemy to counter-charge. Now that that is out of the window, I would like to see a bit more tactical use for peasants: something like a human shield (I know, I am a tyrant).

The issue here is that the description sounds very much akin to the Imperial Detachment System. I believe I speak for all Bretonnia players when I say Bretonnia needs to be clearly seperate from the Empire have have very little in common, tactically and rule-wise. So the challenge would become, how does this happen without stepping on too many toes? Perhaps I am just being too wary of mixing with the Imperials...

Lantern
02-11-2010, 22:33
Ok, trying to keep the wishlisting in check ie, not going for super flying ethereal Grail knights etc, how about giving Grail Knights morning stars, ie +2 strength in ANY first turn of combat. This would help create different uses between the main groups of knights. Knights of the Realm, with lances, do best on the charge. Questing Knights, strike last, but are better for long, drawn out combats (they are as good turn 2 as they were turn 1 etc), and Grail Knights, still being able to charge with +2 strength, but also able to take the charge without losing that bonus, dropping to strength 4 in following turns. Something like this would be a balanced approach to dividing up the knights, whilst giving them thier own uses.

Skjoldr
03-11-2010, 02:43
Ok, trying to keep the wishlisting in check ie, not going for super flying ethereal Grail knights etc, how about giving Grail Knights morning stars, ie +2 strength in ANY first turn of combat. This would help create different uses between the main groups of knights. Knights of the Realm, with lances, do best on the charge. Questing Knights, strike last, but are better for long, drawn out combats (they are as good turn 2 as they were turn 1 etc), and Grail Knights, still being able to charge with +2 strength, but also able to take the charge without losing that bonus, dropping to strength 4 in following turns. Something like this would be a balanced approach to dividing up the knights, whilst giving them thier own uses.


Morning stars are only +1 Strength. But what you could do is allow them to use their lances on the charge, Morning stars in the 2nd round, and then revert to strength 4. And even if charged they'd have +1 strength for the first round.

enygma7
04-11-2010, 01:04
There have been quite a few requests for foot knights (including from me) but from reading various bits of bretonnian background it seems that knights are very averse to ever dismounting (although I find it hard to believe that they just sit on their backsides during seiges and let peasants do all the fighting). Also, I can't see GW giving this option as it detracts from bretonnia's core fighting style.

Bretonnians need to be better at seige warfare and (more commonly) the watchtower scenario. So I'd suggest an upgrade for men at arms: a battering ram!

A rough idea of how I see it working rules wise:
This would be a huge ram headed log on a wheeled platform that goes in the middle of the unit and gets pushed rather like a screaming bell/plague furnace. In normal fighting it does D6 S6 impact hits in every friendly turns round of combat (like the plague furnaces wrecker attack). When attacking a building it offers some form of additional benefit (e.g. allowing more than 10 models to attack due to a breach or granting bonus combat res). If the unit ever flees they abandon the battering ram and it counts as destroyed.

I see this as giving the bretonnians a large, impressive centre piece model, a fluffy additional war machine and also filling a vast tactical hole in the army.

Zaonite
04-11-2010, 01:19
There have been quite a few requests for foot knights (including from me) but from reading various bits of bretonnian background it seems that knights are very averse to ever dismounting (although I find it hard to believe that they just sit on their backsides during seiges and let peasants do all the fighting). Also, I can't see GW giving this option as it detracts from bretonnia's core fighting style.

Bretonnians need to be better at seige warfare and (more commonly) the watchtower scenario. So I'd suggest an upgrade for men at arms: a battering ram!

A rough idea of how I see it working rules wise:
This would be a huge ram headed log on a wheeled platform that goes in the middle of the unit and gets pushed rather like a screaming bell/plague furnace. In normal fighting it does D6 S6 impact hits in every friendly turns round of combat (like the plague furnaces wrecker attack). When attacking a building it offers some form of additional benefit (e.g. allowing more than 10 models to attack due to a breach or granting bonus combat res). If the unit ever flees they abandon the battering ram and it counts as destroyed.

I see this as giving the bretonnians a large, impressive centre piece model, a fluffy additional war machine and also filling a vast tactical hole in the army.

I am strongly against any new war machines or foot troops. But my good man you have settled my heart on this matter. The battering ram is a perfect fit. It fits with the fluff and I can see this being a very elegant solution to the watchtower scenario.

Well done!

Psygon
04-11-2010, 03:26
There have been quite a few requests for foot knights (including from me) but from reading various bits of bretonnian background it seems that knights are very averse to ever dismounting (although I find it hard to believe that they just sit on their backsides during seiges and let peasants do all the fighting). Also, I can't see GW giving this option as it detracts from bretonnia's core fighting style.

Bretonnians need to be better at seige warfare and (more commonly) the watchtower scenario. So I'd suggest an upgrade for men at arms: a battering ram!

A rough idea of how I see it working rules wise:
This would be a huge ram headed log on a wheeled platform that goes in the middle of the unit and gets pushed rather like a screaming bell/plague furnace. In normal fighting it does D6 S6 impact hits in every friendly turns round of combat (like the plague furnaces wrecker attack). When attacking a building it offers some form of additional benefit (e.g. allowing more than 10 models to attack due to a breach or granting bonus combat res). If the unit ever flees they abandon the battering ram and it counts as destroyed.

I see this as giving the bretonnians a large, impressive centre piece model, a fluffy additional war machine and also filling a vast tactical hole in the army.

You certainly could expand even further on the rules aspect of such an item as to allow a bit of (further) flavor and (additional) reasons to add it in your army.

And, hey, heres a under-used model for it!

Charistoph
04-11-2010, 04:07
Make it ASL except on the charge and it sounds perfect.

skavenmatt
04-11-2010, 13:35
Didn't bretonnians used to have different infantry options? I seem to remember back when they were published before 5th edition they had crossbowmen, retainers, knights on foot, squires on foot and on horses, even a bombard thing right?
Maybe they just need to bring back some of the options that they've been making obsolete, or at least revamp them. I agree with needing updated knights, the way they are now just seems like they get more and more costly, for the same amount of bang as regular knights of the realm.
I like the 5th ed fluff where they were all happy go lucky and treated peasents like real people, if they didn't robin hoo, I mean bertrand would come save them. 50000 special characters that were all just special champion choices, and most of them were just fluffy choices to expand on army background or an excuse to hire a sculpter buddy for a week.
I also like the darker tone that they had before 5th ed, and after 5'th ed. Now it's almost implied that their whole society has been manipulated to be buffer to keep athel loren that much safer from outside threats, but somewhere you just gotta draw the line and ask gw to pick one story as a background for the toy soldiers they make us and stick with that story. When lizardmen first came out, they lived under dwarf strongholds and attacked en masse (just like skaven later envolved into doing).
Maybe we'll get some solid fluff, and the few little updates bretonnia needs to be a real contender again.

grumbaki
04-11-2010, 16:14
Sorry to jump in, but...arn't siege weapons only used for sieges? I have never heard of someone using a battering ram against an enemy unit. What do they do, stand there waiting for the ram to hit them? I'm sorry to say it, but a giant wooden rabbit full of knights makes more sense.

However, I do fully support 'professional' men-at-arms, stronger grail knights and different kinds of heroes (be it a bard or peasant heroes).

Kauzu
05-11-2010, 01:54
It would be interesting to see m@a be reworked to start out with just la+hw but have a whole range of different gear options. Creates some variety and is easily worked into the fluff with something to the effect of each lord maintains his own forces. This could solve a lot of the lack of infantry issues if "training" options were also included for purchase that modify the unit and the available gear.

Kisanis
05-11-2010, 03:59
I really do like the idea of some sort of 'pushed' device for the M@A

I think the skaven model could translate well to Brets...
Some sort of Grail device (a la the giant crosses pushed/carried by crusaders) which could be a dual kit that could also work for a revamped reliquae.

As its been said, the core of the army is solid, we just want that little extra to spice us up and keep us seperate from Empire.

For an army of spiritual knights, they are neitehr spiritual, or great knights.

So a small recap of my person wishlist:

Cheaper Knights Errant, no impetuous, just frenzy
Same KOTR
Cheaper Questing knights (assuming things listed later happen)
Boost Grail Knight stats to better reflect the 'living saint' aspect
Seperate Virtues from Magic Items
A second list of Virtues available to Knightly Units (ASF, Frenzy, Hates missile troops, etc...)
Either boost or cheapen Pegasus
Upgrade the Reliquae troops to make them better as a holding force (Heavy Armour, stubborn? something along those lines...)
Slight Cheapening for Mounted Squires
'Veteran' M@A (std Human profile, hand weapon+shield) Upgradable to Spears, Halberds, Greatswords.


I would be happy with those, I think that really is in order of priority for me as well.
thoughts?

Sedge
05-11-2010, 09:45
That all looks great apart from the lack of a 'Robin Hood' unit.

Kisanis
07-11-2010, 21:00
That all looks great apart from the lack of a 'Robin Hood' unit.

Like I said, its what I would be happy about.

If they brought back old Special Characters, then I would hope He'd be in there..

But GW can be hard to follow at times..

KalEf
29-01-2012, 19:20
Do demiHypogryphs exist?... This question is of course prompted by the empire demigryphs.

Sir_Glonojad
29-01-2012, 19:24
They can certainly exist, it's just a whim of will of a games developer... Still, that would be quite far from originality. Even though Demigryphs should have been Bretonnian in the first place! There's not much space left for Bretonnian ideas that would be original or at least - unique ...

Righthandedtwin
29-01-2012, 19:45
Removing GK's as a rare choice and putting them back in as an expensive unit champion upgrade (If a standard Unit Champion costs saay +15 points to upgrade, the the Grail Knight will cost +150) however they will be roughly on par with the armies heroes in terms of strength and can take Virtues like a Noble. Possibly take magic items as well to show the heroic nature of Grail Knights as well as thier rarity and generally Heroic nature.

Replace the "Elite" Unit slot that the Grail Knight rare choice previously occupied with a new unit called something like "Lost Knights" which are based upon the main character from "Guardians of the Forest" being Questing Knights who were losted in the forest of Athel Loren and return decades/centuries later. Lost Knights would have higher WS than Grail Knights and have a special Etheral Horses, Elven steeds soaked in Loren's magic they become spirits of the Jade wind. The Lost Knights can charge through difficult terrain as if it were open terrain and treat dangerous terrain as difficult terrain. They use relic blades which deal magical damage and count as poisoned attacks against any units with the Etheral and Daemon special rules.

Sir_Glonojad
29-01-2012, 20:11
The Lost Knights idea is quite nice, though I seriously doubt GW would use it with all that IP-hype recently*... so You burned the idea by posting it ;)

Still, such hybrid Bretloren unit could even feature as a Rare choice in Wood Elf book ... and we all know that GW loves multi-army entries (giants for everyone!).

For example, Rich Burlew - author of the Order of the Stick webcomic - repeatedly stated that he won't be reading forums for ideas (I believe he doesn't read threads commenting on the comic at all) and posting some plotline proposals is the best way for them not to happen ;)

As for the Grail Knights - in my opinion they should be character only. Another matter is how characters should be available in a Bretonnian army - perhaps the hero allowance should be bumped to some 35-40% to effectively have an option of getting a hero-level leader for most knightly units; I don't believe that it would be "fair" to hide such mighty models as champions bought from Special or even Core allowance; on the other hand, IIRC - that is exactly how You pay for assassins in the Dark Elf army right now (though assassins don't count towards the Core minimum requirement.

Righthandedtwin
29-01-2012, 20:18
The Lost Knights idea is quite nice, though I seriously doubt GW would use it with all that IP-hype recently*... so You burned the idea by posting it ;)

Still, such hybrid Bretloren unit could even feature as a Rare choice in Wood Elf book ... and we all know that GW loves multi-army entries (giants for everyone!).

For example, Rich Burlew - author of the Order of the Stick webcomic - repeatedly stated that he won't be reading forums for ideas (I believe he doesn't read threads commenting on the comic at all) and posting some plotline proposals is the best way for them not to happen ;)

As for the Grail Knights - in my opinion they should be character only. Another matter is how characters should be available in a Bretonnian army - perhaps the hero allowance should be bumped to some 35-40% to effectively have an option of getting a hero-level leader for most knightly units; I don't believe that it would be "fair" to hide such mighty models as champions bought from Special or even Core allowance, though IIRC that is exactly how You pay for assassins in the Dark Elf army right now.

Burned it? probs not haha if they use it I wouldn't care if they stole the thing I'd just be honered they did read my post and thought enough of it to make use of it :L

Sir_Glonojad
29-01-2012, 20:33
So maybe post a "no rights reserved" disclaimer then? ;)

Righthandedtwin
29-01-2012, 20:43
Ofcourse it's not rights reserved it is their IP I am just ripping it off a character from one of the novels. ;)

lbecks
29-01-2012, 20:52
I really do like the idea of some sort of 'pushed' device for the M@A

I think the skaven model could translate well to Brets...
Some sort of Grail device (a la the giant crosses pushed/carried by crusaders) which could be a dual kit that could also work for a revamped reliquae.

As its been said, the core of the army is solid, we just want that little extra to spice us up and keep us seperate from Empire.

For an army of spiritual knights, they are neitehr spiritual, or great knights.

So a small recap of my person wishlist:

Cheaper Knights Errant, no impetuous, just frenzy
Same KOTR
Cheaper Questing knights (assuming things listed later happen)
Boost Grail Knight stats to better reflect the 'living saint' aspect
Seperate Virtues from Magic Items
A second list of Virtues available to Knightly Units (ASF, Frenzy, Hates missile troops, etc...)
Either boost or cheapen Pegasus
Upgrade the Reliquae troops to make them better as a holding force (Heavy Armour, stubborn? something along those lines...)
Slight Cheapening for Mounted Squires
'Veteran' M@A (std Human profile, hand weapon+shield) Upgradable to Spears, Halberds, Greatswords.


I would be happy with those, I think that really is in order of priority for me as well.
thoughts?

I think a really big peasant-pushed/pulled "Crusader Cross" equivalent would work for a Bretonnian super large kit. I'm not sure what GW would do for the 2nd type of that kit.

KalEf
29-01-2012, 22:40
They can certainly exist, it's just a whim of will of a games developer... Still, that would be quite far from originality. Even though Demigryphs should have been Bretonnian in the first place! There's not much space left for Bretonnian ideas that would be original or at least - unique ...

true. it is funny that that GW doesn't give the super heavy human cav, to the heavy cav human army... that has less options already. however hippogryphs are supposed to be more "horse like" than griffons and maybe they just want to keep all of the brit mounts horse like???

reading through these posts, I would like to see some peasant siege engine of sorts, or even just a battering ram unit would be fun and useful

Baron_Nikos_
29-01-2012, 22:44
Not sure if it's been said or not but I would like to see bret cav get some kind of stomp attack? Just to help them out against blocks of infantry

Righthandedtwin
29-01-2012, 22:53
So like a stomp on first turn of combat as the Horses leap into combat, falling amongst the enemy as lances pierce through them?

They could get some monstrous NI by giving questing nights special Horses saaaay like "seekers desteriary" or something. Huge massive Warhorses the largest to be bred in a Nobles stable that are given to the questing knights due to thier strength and power...thus giving them a MI type unit with a stomp attack and gets great synergy with the QK's. Although with that in mind they can break QK down into smaller units....so rather than manouvering huge armies of the guys you get small bands of the guys joining up together on thier quest.

The Low King
29-01-2012, 22:58
Impact hits. D3 per rank or something? make Brett cav very good

Lantern
29-01-2012, 22:58
Well, if we're wish listing, how about the only change being unit wide Knightly Virtues, ie placing a character with the relevant virtue into a unit would grant that bonus to the unit as a whole? The Virtue of Noble Disdain already has a secondary effect that works on units (the character hates enemies with ranged attacks, the unit gets to ignore panic caused by said attacks). Spreading that out to each virtue, you could have your Heroic Killing Blow character bestow basic Killing Blow to his unit. the Virtue of Knightly Temper, as well as granting the character his bonus extra attacks for each wound caused might also give his unit Hatred. Without having to add a single new model to the range you could completely add to the army dynamic, without losing a thing. Perhaps, extending that more, only certain units could benefit from certain virtues (Virtue of the Impetuous Knight is re-usable by Knights Errant, otherwise it's once per game etc). Tomb Kings show how this could be managed with thier My Will Be Done rule, but an army of heroes leading glorious knightly charges into the enemy - what's not to love?

KalEf
30-01-2012, 01:08
Well, if we're wish listing, how about the only change being unit wide Knightly Virtues, ie placing a character with the relevant virtue into a unit would grant that bonus to the unit as a whole? The Virtue of Noble Disdain already has a secondary effect that works on units (the character hates enemies with ranged attacks, the unit gets to ignore panic caused by said attacks). Spreading that out to each virtue, you could have your Heroic Killing Blow character bestow basic Killing Blow to his unit. the Virtue of Knightly Temper, as well as granting the character his bonus extra attacks for each wound caused might also give his unit Hatred. Without having to add a single new model to the range you could completely add to the army dynamic, without losing a thing. Perhaps, extending that more, only certain units could benefit from certain virtues (Virtue of the Impetuous Knight is re-usable by Knights Errant, otherwise it's once per game etc). Tomb Kings show how this could be managed with thier My Will Be Done rule, but an army of heroes leading glorious knightly charges into the enemy - what's not to love?
I wouldn't mind if it worked like the old chaos marks. That would give a lot more options without having to add anything odd.

laribold
30-01-2012, 08:50
Well, if we're wish listing, how about the only change being unit wide Knightly Virtues, ie placing a character with the relevant virtue into a unit would grant that bonus to the unit as a whole? The Virtue of Noble Disdain already has a secondary effect that works on units (the character hates enemies with ranged attacks, the unit gets to ignore panic caused by said attacks). Spreading that out to each virtue, you could have your Heroic Killing Blow character bestow basic Killing Blow to his unit. the Virtue of Knightly Temper, as well as granting the character his bonus extra attacks for each wound caused might also give his unit Hatred. Without having to add a single new model to the range you could completely add to the army dynamic, without losing a thing. Perhaps, extending that more, only certain units could benefit from certain virtues (Virtue of the Impetuous Knight is re-usable by Knights Errant, otherwise it's once per game etc). Tomb Kings show how this could be managed with thier My Will Be Done rule, but an army of heroes leading glorious knightly charges into the enemy - what's not to love?

I vote for this!

Great idea, very flavourful and fluffy whilst having a decent in game effect.

StygianBeach
30-01-2012, 13:39
I vote for this!

Great idea, very flavourful and fluffy whilst having a decent in game effect.

Wow, that is a great idea. Virtues that buffs the Hero and gives a minor buff to the unit.

I am quite happy with the Brets book as it is. Just adjust the point costs mainly.

Things I would like to see changed are Pesant Bowmen get Armour piercing in close range. Pesant men at arms get a Weapon skill 3 upgrade option, kinda like Orc Big Uns.
Paladins getting prayer upgrade options (Earth Blood, Flesh to Stone, Regrowth from law of life) and Troubador upgrade options (sings a song for a bonus as with 5th ed).

New units like, Elite Crossbowmen, crappy Cannons, Hippogriff Knights.

Snowflake
30-01-2012, 22:10
I posted this a while back on the roundtable. It's slightly outdated but I think it will still prove accurate. Some of it was in response to other wishlisting. In particular I believe that the overall balance of the 4 books out now has been very solid relative to each other, so I want to see that continue.


I think it's important to keep in mind where the book should end up in terms of relative power. Two 8th edition books have been released so far, and both of them have been approximately in the "solid but not overwhelming" category. We'll see soon if they manage to put Ogres at the same approximate level of power. If so, then the hope is that the overly powerful or cheap books, like demons or dark elves, will be brought down to that level once they are redone.

I realize that Devastating Charge makes more sense on our knights that it does for anywhere else. But the fact is, our knights don't really have any problems on the charge. Adding that much power to them might risk bringing the book up to the level of the old overpowered books, and ruin this nice (though short) trend of solid books that they have going. If that happened, it would shove the currently redone books into the low end of the scale, putting us back where we were in terms of poor overall balance.

For that reason, I don't think all of our Knights will get D-Charge. Maybe Grail Knights, but that's probably about it. Personally I'd rather see T4 on Grail Knights with Full Plate, and something done to questing knights to make them more useful. I think they should also redo the Grail Reliquae completely, and turn it into more of a War Altar/Anvil of Doom/Screaming Bell/Casket of Souls thing. An activated war machine style thing, difficult to kill, that gives out bonuses or other effects. Have it guarded/carried by some sort of Knights Templar or something. Personally I think it makes more sense anyway. I never understood why such a holy relic would be carried around by rabble.

We are also going to get some sort of monster or two, that's a given. Every single book has gotten one, and they've been popular models that have generated a lot of sales. While there's nothing in the lore that really supports using a monster, I can't think of anything that would really forbid it. Similar to how the King has a Hippogryph, lorewise it could just be a monster of some sort ridden by a knight who was awesome enough to tame it. The Knight's statline on the back of a Hippogryph would make up for the Hippo's stats being a bit subpar when compared to other monsters.

Edit : Oh, and most of the magic items will be going away. We'll have 8-10 like the other books. The hope is that we'll still be able to have Virtues, and I think it's probably a reasonable hope.

And the follow-up to that:


I recognize the fluff objections that people have, but really, we need to be realistic here. Every book GW has put out has added one or more monsters. They have been wildly popular for them, and from a pure modeling standpoint, it's a lot easier to make a good monster model than it is to make a good small model. Just look at the Tomb Kings, the Sphinxes and Necropolis Knights are very popular, whearas you'll be hard pressed to find someone that likes the Necrotect or new Liche Priest models. If we decide up front that we object to monster models being added, that will only lead to disappointment.

Moreover, I think the disconnect here is usage of the word monster. I think that for some people that conjures up a very specific portion of savage beasts. But consider, a Pegasus is, in essence, a monster, albeit a noble one. So is the King's Hippogryph. Yet they have been part of our army for a very long time. In we continue that train of thought, we can develop a "monster" that will fit the bill for large model, yet still have the focus on the Knight that is riding it, rather than the monster itself. This can be kept with the lore by finding a sufficiently noble "monster," such as a Hippogryph, or something new. Hopefully not a Dragon, there are enough of those, but there are lots of options out there.

My real fear is based on looking at other parts of the trend. All of the last 3 books (I'm including Ogres though it's not out yet) have had a howdah crew type monster. The Arachnarok, the Warsphinx, and the Thundertusk all have multiple crewmembers in a howdah type setup. I would not like to see that at all. The worst would be some creature crewed by peasants, but even if the crew is Knights, it still doesn't make sense. Better by far to have that hero-type Knight riding a noble sort of monster.

But make no mistake, it'll be something large. There is no way it won't be, their large models have been too successful for them to not continue along that path. Moreover, it'll be their way of attempting to get more people to buy the army when the book comes out. They'll give them shiny new monsters to look at, just as they have with OnG, TK, and OK. We just have to make our peace with that, and hope that they keep the focus on the Knight that is riding it, rather than the monster itself.

Mozzamanx
31-01-2012, 00:29
I think Bretonnia has enormous potential when it comes to a redo. I've considered what I'd like to see, and don't think its too far out of line with the other 8th edition books:


Blessing and Lance as we love them.
Virtues changed to characterise units, similar to the Grey Knight Psychic powers. For example, Knights of the Realm have the 'Virtue of the Joust', allowing them to reroll 1s to hit. Certain Virtues are character-exclusive and may be bought as normal.
Troubadours / Bards available as an upgrade to Musicians, granting minor benefits.

Lord renamed to Duke, remove the option for Grail Vow. I would also drop the Hippogyph to 125pts, and allow Barding for +20pts.
New Lord choice, 'Living Saint'. This is the Grail Lord, boasting a slightly better statline.
Similarly, 'Paladin' could be the name for the Hero-level Grail Knight, while 'Duke' represents the standard Hero.
Damsels and Prophetesses both gain access to the Lore of Light.

Knights of the Realm- Virtue of the Joust, allowing them to reroll any 1's to hit on the charge. Possibly increase to I4 and allow units to purchase Morning Stars for +3pts/model.
Knights Errant- Redone to HW/Shield as they are trying to earn their Lance. Virtue of Impetuousness, grants them Frenzy.
Men-At-Arms- WS3?
Peasant Bowmen


Questing Knights- Again, entirely rethought. They are characterised by a random table and a unit size of 3+, since they are relatively rare. Table includes various abilities like Vanguard (For glory!), Ambush (Heroic Intervention) or T4 (Weathered).
Pegasus Knights- Remove the 0-1 limit
Battle Pilgrims- I like them, just need a price break
Mounted Yeomen
Armoured Sergeants- 'Elite' Peasants wearing Heavy Armour and Halberds, with some bonuses for defending terrain?
Pavise Crossbowmen- 'Elite' Archers with Crossbows and hefty shields, granting +3 to saves against ranged weaponry.
Knights of the Round- I would completely change Grail Knights, and so the models need to be capable of representing something else. These are elite Knights who guard the Dukes, with the statline of current Grails but without the Blessing benefits. Maybe 32pts each, and a bodyguard-related Virtue.

Field Trebuchet- I think a drop to S4 could be justified while still being extremely potent. Otherwise a hefty price increase is really needed.
Grail Knights- I think there are 2 reasonable options here: Either a unit of character-equivalents (2W, 60ish pts each), or a unit on par with Chaos Knights (S4, T4). Depends whether we want to go for Lore-Grails, or keep Chaos Knights as the badasses they should be.
Pale Riders- Ethereal Knights similar to the Green Knight. They don't really do anything for me, but the rulebook mentions them and they could be cool.
Asrai Archers- Purely a fluff unit, throw some Wood Elves in as a Rare choice. To make them stand out I'd go for BS5, Scout and Skirmisher, with Glade Guard Longbows. Somewhere around 18pts per model?

Hippogryph Knight- Because every army is getting a monster. Make it some sort of super-heavy cavalry, formed of Bretonnias best Knights on Hippogryphs. A WS5, A2 Knight on a Barded Hippogryph (4+ total save) is very cool, somewhat in line and fits the criteria of every army needing a monster in 8th.


I would like to see Bretonnia as a relatively historical army, hence the Pavises and low-fantasty outside the Rare section. I'd love to see each type of Knight become distinct and clearly intended for a particular function, even if it means changing the model style.
Realm- Standard Knight, with a nasty charge and fairly priced. Based around using Lances.
Errant- Characterised by Frenzy, granting lots of attacks at low WS/S. Frenzy is a simple way to represent enthusiasm, hindered with a lack of skill or control. (Rather than frothing lunacy)
Questing- Unreliable and unpredictable, but could end up saving the day by coming exactly when needed.
(Round)- Elite Knights to tackle the nastiest enemies on the other side. Intended to ride with your General and provide an unstoppable force, while protecting him from harm.
(Hippogryph)- Monster-level.

Grails would then operate on their own little level, wherever would be most appropriate. I would personally love to see them as characters but I understand if people would prefer them at Chaos-levels.

The Low King
31-01-2012, 01:01
If you want to field an army of infantry play empire.