PDA

View Full Version : Shieldwall on Hammerers??



GreaseMonkey
10-03-2014, 22:57
Hi guys, I played my two first games with the new Dwarf army book, quite like it so far. Last game I noticed something that makes quite little sense to me. Hammerers have the shieldwall rule, as almost everything else in the army, but they also have greatweapons, which prevents the use of shields for armor save and parry. So what is the point of giving them the rule? As far as me and my friends could figure out, this rule with this unit is useless, there doesn't seem to be any way with the current rules that you could benefit the +1 parry bonus. That made us think that maybe they are planning to change weapon loadout rules. Maybe that in the future a unit having greatweapons AND hand weapons in their loadout could choose whichever weapon they want to use much like the Armed to da teef rule of the Black Orcs, effectively giving a way to use the shieldwall bonus on hammerers when paying for shield and selecting the hand weapon instead of GW.

The other thing is the actual option of the shields on hammerers. 1 point per model (exactly the same value as all the others) for useless shields ,let alone very circonstential shooting save, feels wrong? Is it only an armybook mistake and it just shouldn't be there at all? The idea of shielded Hammerers with hand weapon + shield is extremely inviting with their two attacks and 4+ 5+ save in cc...

Lorm
10-03-2014, 23:15
Maybe this, or it's just there for consistency in the rules (or even laziness).
Actually many units have the option for shields, or have as standard equipment, even though they can't use them in close combat (example: Temple Guard), so it's nothing really new, but surely it's possible to see this kind of changes in 9th more than any others. (light changes, very easily done and not really game-breaking while giving more options)

mmckeddie
10-03-2014, 23:25
Previous to 8th edition, you could choose what weapon to use in close combat if you had multiple options. Since everyone had a hand weapon in addition to their main one (GW, spear, halbred etc) you could take advantage to hand weapon & shield bonus if that was a better option based on what you were fighting.
One of the things I hope they incorporate again in 9th...

Lord Dan
11-03-2014, 00:16
Maybe this, or it's just there for consistency in the rules (or even laziness).
Actually many units have the option for shields, or have as standard equipment, even though they can't use them in close combat (example: Temple Guard), so it's nothing really new, but surely it's possible to see this kind of changes in 9th more than any others. (light changes, very easily done and not really game-breaking while giving more options)

If it was for consistency's sake, Rangers (which come with Great Weapons) have access to shields, but not the Shieldwall rule. Shieldwall stands out as unique compared to the option to take shields in an of itself because the rule is currently unuseable, whereas GW-armed units with shields will at least derive a benefit in the form of +1 AS against shooting (which is why my Hammerers have shields on their backs :p).

It was either a silly mistake, or, more likely, a hint that 9th edition will see a return to the 7th edition pre-combat weapon selection rules. 9th edition foreshadowing would also help explain why the Bolt Thrower mysteriously went up in price...

bigbiggles
11-03-2014, 04:17
Did it really go up? I have not even looked at that silly choice

Lord Dan
11-03-2014, 05:03
Yes, really.

Alltaken
11-03-2014, 16:09
The other thing. Minis, temple guard have the shield stuck in the arm.
So you pretty much need to convert them if shields were optkonal

From my servoskull