PDA

View Full Version : Does dwellers below need to be 'toned down'?



Sinsigel
21-05-2014, 15:38
I know there are other no save 'A-bomb' spells in other 8 lore of battle magic : pit of shades, purple sun for example.
Of course, there are other killer spells in 8th ed. army books but few of them entirely remove models with no saves allowed.
Even the Dark elf black horror allows single ward save while Ogre kingdoms 6th spell deals multiple wounds(D3).
This is what makes the no-save spells in the BRB particularly devastating. Dwellers however I believe demands a special mention.

Apart from ignoring saves and removing a model entirely, dwellers is quite different from other equivalent killer spells.
One thing is that it is rather 'accurate' compared to pit or purple sun. Pit of shades scatter, while purple sun travels random distances
or even causes misfire. Dwellers however have decent range(24" when boosted) and doesn't have any backfire.
More important thing however is that dwellers doesn't allow look out sir roll, putting vast majority of characters,
especially ubiquitous S3~S4 lord-level wizards into serious danger.
Apart from greater daemons, Ogre wizards inside rune maw unit, vampire counts,
there are very few wizards who do not tremble at the moment when 6-dice are rolled for dwellers.

These reasons, especially the second one, are why I often detest the spell and its influence on game.
In the edition where Lv4 wizard is considered almost mandatory and possess power to exert great in-game influence,
being able to remove(very easily) that important model with a single casting and then dominate the game onwards seemed too extreme to me.
(One extreme example would be a gunline empire with S-tanks and demigryphs dwellering the LM slann in turn one and start shooting mercilessly)
Well, not only wizards but even combat lords who have S4. Vampire counts and chaos lords are the few who can ignore the threat.

However, I do realize the role of dwellers in the game - countermeasure for deathstars.
Hence why I still think retaining the spell isn't a bad idea.
The only change I would like to see is that the spell inflicts a single wound with no saves allows instead of completely removing the model.
This would mitigate the problem of having lord-level characters(esp. wizards) with single casting/characteristic test, while retaining the ability to cripple deathstars.

My argument however might be a bit one-sided because I play high elves whose S3 wizards detest dwellers above all else.
Truly, armies such ogre kingdoms would regard purple sun as more serious threat while WoC, daemons, vampire counts don't give a s*it about dwellers.
I just wrote up my ideas while seeing the tendency of 'toning' down no-save spells in 8th ed. army books(e.g. black horror allowing single ward save),
and wanted to discuss about the future 'possibilities'.

Mozzamanx
21-05-2014, 15:47
I think spells like Dwellers, Purple Sun and Transmutation need to be in the game because they are the single largest counter to deathstar units. I view the Steadfast, Horde and increased benefit from Augment spells to be a fair trade-off for the increased vulnerability to mega spells. For reference, a MSU player has much less to fear from these spells and I don't find them to be obnoxiously powerful unless applied against an enemy that is using equally obnoxious mechanics that you just happen to counter.
However Dwellers does not just deal with deathstars, it also destroys enemy characters and Monstrous Infantry. It also has no real penalty to the user, since Throne can prevent Miscasts and there is no rebound mechanic like the Sun.

- I'd limit it to causing a single Wound and thus prevent the mass-murder of BSBs, Wizards and Ogres while still brutalising the actual unit.
- There could be a Misfire mechanic rolled into it without too much trouble. Easiest would be that the Wizard loses control and his own unit suffers the tests...
- Probably reduce the range, a 24" boost is fairly unjustified. Perhaps allow the Boosted version to do something else instead, though I don't have any immediate ideas.

Snake1311
21-05-2014, 16:06
Just needs to be reworded to cause a hit, which then triggers the instagib strength test. Essentially an imaginary template that hits every model in the unit. Then characters will get Look out rolls, like they do against Pit and Sun.

Any other solution creates problems, namely:

- single wound/d3 wounds makes the spell less effective against MI/MC, as it takes off a smaller % of the unit - and makes it horrible against single lage targets.
- allowing wards means also allowing MR, and since msot deathstars full of characters are at MR 2 or 3 to prevent snipes, this makes it effectively useless in dealing with deathstars.

Allowing look out rolls means its still a big threat against deathstars packed with characters, as the odds of doing damage somewhere increase with the amount of look out rolls forced. Its also got the addded benefit that every passed look out roll goes toward the unit - so if the characters survived, at least the surrounding unit took more of a beating. However, it means that dwellering the single enemy level 4 mage in a bunker of 10-15 core troops is no longer a good idea.

Sexiest_hero
21-05-2014, 17:22
If you hate lord/heroes deathstars or massive hordes you like 6th spells, if you like those things you hate 6th spells. I'd be all for LoS rools for the spells if we didn't see things like Vampire and Ogre deathstars.

Brother Fenix
21-05-2014, 17:33
The simple answer is no. It's a single spell in one of the Lores that almost every caster in every army, with few exceptions, has access to. Those that don't have access to Lore of Life have other extremely powerful monsters and units (looking at you WoC) as you mentioned above, that have high strength values on their basic troops, which makes dwelllers so much less effective.

Interstingly, I don't see a lot of players selecting Lore of Life, especially if they have other options, and I see even fewer selecting it in the hopes that they get that one spell.

Can it turn the tide of a battle? Yes, but so can many other random factors in the game, such as failing to get the 21+ needed on 5-6 dice plus a level 4 caster, or rolling 5-6 dice and getting a miscast (without throne of vines) and killing your level 4 caster and several of his buddies.

I do see your point about the lack of any save, even other instant death game effects, such as heroic killing blow, give a ward save. You would have to admit there is no risk to your model in cases like that, and it's not a random dice roll to obtain it, you pay for it up front when create your army.

Urgat
21-05-2014, 17:35
You want to tone down dwellers bellow? You want it to go under!? :eek:

Sinsigel
21-05-2014, 17:35
If you hate lord/heroes deathstars or massive hordes you like 6th spells, if you like those things you hate 6th spells. I'd be all for LoS rools for the spells if we didn't see things like Vampire and Ogre deathstars.

I get your point, but as far as we focus on dwellers below, i don't think either vampire counts(S5 wizards) or gutstars(mandatory rune maws) are even remotely
affected by dwellers below.

Phazael
21-05-2014, 17:41
Its the one spell that dorks elven deathstars. It needs to exist and, frankly, its the easiest of the kill spells to defend against.

theunwantedbeing
21-05-2014, 17:47
It's fine, it's a counter to deathstars.
Ideally it should kill on 2+ because then it would be an even better counter.


;)

Clockwork
21-05-2014, 18:05
In the "Warlocks are OP" thread, there's a sustained argument that Witch Elves are also OP. Spells like Dwellers is one of the reasons that they are not.

There's ways to mitigate Dwellers: keep your Death Stars/Character bunkers outside of 24", don't pile all your characters into one bunker, etc. But sometimes, things are just going to go bad.

Allowing Ward saves on all 'no save' spells wouldn't do much harm, though, imo.

Urgat
21-05-2014, 19:58
Btw, heh. So all those units are not OP because of spells like dwellers. My greenskin shamans give such a damn, you wouldn't believe.

Sexiest_hero
21-05-2014, 20:21
They arn't a perfect counter or even a good one to deathstars, the only give one hope of a failed roll, and that's better than the no hope that you usually see when there is a witch elf deathstar. Is Dwellers just about worthless against a WOC unkillablere rollable warsave doom lord. Yes. But Just about worthless is better than completely worthless like if that OP nastiness makes combat. Fix deathstars and 6th spells.

Clockwork
21-05-2014, 20:23
They arn't a perfect counter or even a good one to deathstars, the only give one hope of a failed roll, and that's better than the no hope that you usually see when there is a witch elf deathstar. Is Dwellers just about worthless against a WOC unkillablere rollable warsave doom lord. Yes. But Just about worthless is better than completely worthless like if that OP nastiness makes combat. Fix deathstars and 6th spells.

You know what would fix that? A template spell in Lore of Metal that removed models, no saves allowed, based on their armour save.

Yeah. Then WoC would understand what its like to play Lizardmen in a Purple Sun environment.

Edit: I suppose what I'm saying is that, rather than nerfing all the template/all models in a unit spells, there should be one that targets 6 of the major stats equally in a fair distribution across all armies. For instance, WS/S/T/I/Ld(?)/AS. That way, everyone would fear something, rather than some armies getting unfairly shafted whilst others get away scot-free.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath
21-05-2014, 21:43
Dwellers is fine.

It's short range, requires a lot of dice to cast, and has a max 50% chance of killing even S3 characters (and even less for most others). That elves are extra vulnerable to it offsets the fact that they're practically immune to the other big kill spells. Most importantly, it's the single biggest deterrent to taking big elven deathstars (which are incredibly un-fun to play against). Note too that against anything S4 or better Final Trans is just as effective, and is also cheaper to cast and has better range (oh...and makes things around the unit stupid).

The only thing I might change about the spell is to up the casting cost a bit.

Phazael
21-05-2014, 22:44
The spell is fine as it is. Really, compare it to PSun or even Final Trans, and its less powerful. It also sits in a much worse lore than those two.

theshoveller
22-05-2014, 07:25
You know what would fix that? A template spell in Lore of Metal that removed models, no saves allowed, based on their armour save.

Yeah. Then WoC would understand what its like to play Lizardmen in a Purple Sun environment.

Edit: I suppose what I'm saying is that, rather than nerfing all the template/all models in a unit spells, there should be one that targets 6 of the major stats equally in a fair distribution across all armies. For instance, WS/S/T/I/Ld(?)/AS. That way, everyone would fear something, rather than some armies getting unfairly shafted whilst others get away scot-free.
*blinks many times*

I can't tell if you're being facetious or not...

Clockwork
22-05-2014, 08:03
Nope, I just like balance. There's no reason why some armies should be particularly vulnerable to one spell (Undead/Ogres/Dwarfs/Saurus/etc and Purple Sun are something like 1/6 or 2/6 survival for the most part), some armies are sort of vulnerable (Elves and Dwellers, which is like 50-50), whilst others have no or little vulnerability (WoC and any of the templates/all models in one unit have a 2/3 survival rate). Make sure that there's a 6th level spell that can counter everything.

All armies should be free to pile all their points into a Death Star, so long as they accept the risk that someone may 6-dice something to try and take it all off.

Greyshadow
22-05-2014, 08:33
Fantastic and insightful discussion here. I love these mega spells, anything in the game that makes you visibly wince when your opponent rolls the dice in my view is awesome!

In terms of balance I am inclined to agree with the people who say they are fine as they are - it gives the meta a chance to adjust against a prevalence of boring deathstar armies (yes, they are boring). I hope magic stays as frightening and exciting as it is in the next edition.

I certainly take the point about wiping of important characters, pretty rough if the vampire lord gets reliably gibbed due to six dicing. There are ways to reduce the risk of this happening though.

theunwantedbeing
22-05-2014, 09:09
I certainly take the point about wiping of important characters, pretty rough if the vampire lord gets reliably gibbed due to six dicing. There are ways to reduce the risk of this happening though.

Yeah, don't get hit by dwellers.
If you do get hit, don't roll that reliable 6, roll an unreliable 1-5 instead.

Along with all the other million ways to easily avoid this spell.

Leogun_91
22-05-2014, 10:04
Dwellers is in no way a balanced spell, it is the best block wiping spell, the best wizard snipe spell and the most evil when used in a combo (though the last requires the use of a second wizard with another lore). Occasionally there is another spell which is worse when it hits your unit but that is occasionally, most of the time dwellers just picks of half/a third of your unit and the same amount from the characters placed in it with nothing you can do about it.
Yes it stops deathstars but it also stops most everything else, to discourage deathstars I suggest making more "stop the unit from doing things" hexes instead, these can be made cheap enough to cast and a big risk of a 700pts+ unit having to skip a few turns in a game would be bad enough to nerf deathstars, add to that harsher penalties for flank or rear charges and the issue would be solved.

forseer of fates
22-05-2014, 10:27
That and purple sun.

Snake1311
22-05-2014, 10:54
The complaints about dwellers have nothing to do with deathstars and everything to do with them targetting level 4 wizards in a unit of whatever at a distance of 24" (which is NOT short range by the way) with a 50% chance to gib them.

S5 vampire deathstars don't care, and neither do ogre blocks, who have the Maw banner anyway. Its occurances like downing a Tomb King's mandatory heirophant with them being unable to do anything about it that are the problem.

Voss
22-05-2014, 11:10
If you hate lord/heroes deathstars or massive hordes you like 6th spells, if you like those things you hate 6th spells. I'd be all for LoS rools for the spells if we didn't see things like Vampire and Ogre deathstars.

The sensible thing is to hate both, since both concepts warp the game unduly.

Hoffa
22-05-2014, 11:57
The big 3 (Dweller, pit purple sun) needs a nerf. First all of them should cause a wound with no armour saves. Ward saves should work as normal. (Yes I know BotW but that is a different problem) Second. Dwellers might be fine but the other two are to deadly against low initiative armies. A lucky cast of purple sun against dwarfs means that its game over for them. Extremely frustrating and boring to lose to.

A good change might be to get rid of the characteristic test and just have these spells cause a wound on a 4+ with no armour save.

thormon
22-05-2014, 12:36
Ward saves should work as normal. (Yes I know BotW but that is a different problem)
The problem is that some armies use ward saves in place of armour saves. Some armies don't have access at all to ward saves on their units. This would leave chaos and elves, who due to their statline are already not as sensitive to these spells, with another bonus against them.

Snake1311
22-05-2014, 12:59
The big 3 (Dweller, pit purple sun) needs a nerf. First all of them should cause a wound with no armour saves. Ward saves should work as normal. (Yes I know BotW but that is a different problem) Second. Dwellers might be fine but the other two are to deadly against low initiative armies. A lucky cast of purple sun against dwarfs means that its game over for them. Extremely frustrating and boring to lose to.

A good change might be to get rid of the characteristic test and just have these spells cause a wound on a 4+ with no armour save.

You shouldn't modify pit/sun to cause a single wound, because then they become absolutely useless against single targets (low I monster) or monsterous stuff like Ogres, Trolls and Beasts of Nurgle. Why should there be a difference of kill chance if you are pelting the spell at 20 10-point infantry models, or 5 40-point MI models, or one 200 pt monster?

Pit really doesn't belong in this category of uberspells, whereas Sun's OP-ness largely comes from its range - so a nerf to the travel distance is actually probably more appropriate. Still, even with dwarfs as my main army, its nowhere near as offensive as dwellers - which is the only real culprit.

Hoffa
22-05-2014, 13:15
Strange I play Dwarfs as well and I'm terrified of P.Sun but not to afraid of Dwellers, units are S3 and S4 so there will be a lot less casualities against Dwellers.


The problem is that some armies use ward saves in place of armour saves. Some armies don't have access at all to ward saves on their units. This would leave chaos and elves, who due to their statline are already not as sensitive to these spells, with another bonus against them.

All armies have access to items granting magic resistance, do they not. The reason that MR does not work against the nuke spells is why you seldom see it taken.


You shouldn't modify pit/sun to cause a single wound, because then they become absolutely useless against single targets (low I monster) or monsterous stuff like Ogres, Trolls and Beasts of Nurgle. Why should there be a difference of kill chance if you are pelting the spell at 20 10-point infantry models, or 5 40-point MI models, or one 200 pt monster?

Why should there be a mega nuke spell that is reliably can kill anything with low I. All other things are good against some targets but not against others. Pit and Sun should be so to.

Vipoid
22-05-2014, 14:04
You shouldn't modify pit/sun to cause a single wound, because then they become absolutely useless against single targets (low I monster) or monsterous stuff like Ogres, Trolls and Beasts of Nurgle. Why should there be a difference of kill chance if you are pelting the spell at 20 10-point infantry models, or 5 40-point MI models, or one 200 pt monster?

Sorry, but why should these nuke spells be able to remove anything from the game - regardless of wounds or protections?

I don't see they should have a good chance of annihilating characters or monsters. Shouldn't that be left to the single-target Death spells like Leech Life?

I can see the issue with units of Monstrous Infantry, but I still don't see it as enough reason to give spells like this that much power.

Likewise, I get that Death Stars are frustrating and dull - but that shouldn't be used as a reason to add more frustrating and dull stuff to the game.

I think Death Stars should be tackled in other ways - e.g. by changing how attacks are allocated in combat, to prevent character-walls blocking access to R&F.

Phazael
22-05-2014, 16:28
Sorry, but why should these nuke spells be able to remove anything from the game - regardless of wounds or protections?

Because then people should be making armies with more smaller units instead of slapping everything into a giant deathstar with the crown of command. People who play hate on dwellers are mainly upset that they cannot just plop a 4++ wizard into their giant point denial deathstar and call it a day. I have found that the people who complain the most about Dwellers are the same people who sport a death wizard with the Talisman of Preservation and MR2 in their army and focus on sniping a couple characters on the way to point denial wins. Dwellers is a counterbalance to this sort of annoying "tactic" and encourage people to spread their characters around.

Diminishing the power of dwellers is as simple as putting your wizard in a bunker behind the main battle line. Stop dumping five guys into your 40 man White Lion deathstar with the I Win Banner and treating the movement phase as a mere formality.

Vipoid
22-05-2014, 16:32
Because then people should be making armies with more smaller units instead of slapping everything into a giant deathstar with the crown of command. People who play hate on dwellers are mainly upset that they cannot just plop a 4++ wizard into their giant point denial deathstar and call it a day.

But that's the point - it doesn't matter where a character goes. Unless you can hide him right at the back of the board, he isn't safe.

Similarly, what about monsters? How do they fit in?

Sinsigel
22-05-2014, 16:36
Because then people should be making armies with more smaller units instead of slapping everything into a giant deathstar with the crown of command. People who play hate on dwellers are mainly upset that they cannot just plop a 4++ wizard into their giant point denial deathstar and call it a day. I have found that the people who complain the most about Dwellers are the same people who sport a death wizard with the Talisman of Preservation and MR2 in their army and focus on sniping a couple characters on the way to point denial wins. Dwellers is a counterbalance to this sort of annoying "tactic" and encourage people to spread their characters around.

Diminishing the power of dwellers is as simple as putting your wizard in a bunker behind the main battle line. Stop dumping five guys into your 40 man White Lion deathstar with the I Win Banner and treating the movement phase as a mere formality.

No offence, but I always have trouble understanding the way to 'diminish' the dwellers.
It doesn't really matter whether the target of the dwelllers is a deathstar or not. Just cast the spell on whatever unit the Lv4 wizard is and see it removed on 33%~50%,
take away several hundred VP and dominate the magic phase, which is way much more worth than how much the wizard costs.

Also, I never really get this 'I win banner' sarcasm unless HE are against non-Kairos daemons list, but I would be off-topic if I discuss further.

leopard
22-05-2014, 16:40
Only change I;d make is perhaps knock 6" off the range, otherwise its fine, and its not too bad as it stands, my Greenies have been hurt by it, and purple sun, but to be honest the best defence is splitting up a bit. An army that depends on 6 dicing a spell onto a critical unit it utterly stuffed when you have no critical unit

Phazael
22-05-2014, 18:29
No offence, but I always have trouble understanding the way to 'diminish' the dwellers.
It doesn't really matter whether the target of the dwelllers is a deathstar or not. Just cast the spell on whatever unit the Lv4 wizard is and see it removed on 33%~50%,
take away several hundred VP and dominate the magic phase, which is way much more worth than how much the wizard costs.

Also, I never really get this 'I win banner' sarcasm unless HE are against non-Kairos daemons list, but I would be off-topic if I discuss further.

If your caster is sitting in a bunker unit behind a bunch of primary line units, it is really hard to get into range without exposing their own wizard to a counter charge first or traditional wizard hunters. Further, if your characters are spread out among several units, the risk is less attractive, especially if you are running multiple L2s for magic instead of a single decked out L4. Most single wizard builds have sufficient points to slap a potion of strength on the wizard, so if your environment is dominated by this behavior, you can defend against it by chugging said potion on the turn they move into position to unleash this spell, which should be the one window in the game they get to do it. Compare this to a spell like PSun, where the wizard can be in combat and firing it off with reckless abandon every turn, and you will understand that it does not really measure up in abusiveness. Basically, the more you design your army around deathstar builds that avoid direct combat, the harder this spell is going to punish you. I do not see this as a bad thing.

And, yeah the banner jab is a separate discussion... BUT in most of the GTs I have been to of late, the guy abusing dwellers is generally the high elf guy with all of his marbles shoved into that one unit and relying on the banner to six dice it with impunity. Outside of the odd monster mash Lizardman build, you just do not see anyone else running lore of life in competitive play these days.

SteveW
22-05-2014, 18:40
I don't think I saw any lore of life at all at WCGT this year. Then again I played 3xDE WoC and Daemons for my 5 games.

olderplayer
22-05-2014, 21:59
If your caster is sitting in a bunker unit behind a bunch of primary line units, it is really hard to get into range without exposing their own wizard to a counter charge first or traditional wizard hunters. Further, if your characters are spread out among several units, the risk is less attractive, especially if you are running multiple L2s for magic instead of a single decked out L4. Most single wizard builds have sufficient points to slap a potion of strength on the wizard, so if your environment is dominated by this behavior, you can defend against it by chugging said potion on the turn they move into position to unleash this spell, which should be the one window in the game they get to do it. Compare this to a spell like PSun, where the wizard can be in combat and firing it off with reckless abandon every turn, and you will understand that it does not really measure up in abusiveness. Basically, the more you design your army around deathstar builds that avoid direct combat, the harder this spell is going to punish you. I do not see this as a bad thing.

And, yeah the banner jab is a separate discussion... BUT in most of the GTs I have been to of late, the guy abusing dwellers is generally the high elf guy with all of his marbles shoved into that one unit and relying on the banner to six dice it with impunity. Outside of the odd monster mash Lizardman build, you just do not see anyone else running lore of life in competitive play these days.

First, if you are six dicing dwellers, then the range is 24" and most shooting and magic casters have to get within 18" to 24" to cast most of the useful offensive and defensive magic spells. Also, if you try to stay out of 24" range, the opposing guy will move or march forward just enough to get back within 24". Also, it is a direct damage spell, so no line of sight issues (not much of an issue anyway with no cover save concept and true line of sight in 8th edition). So, that elite unit with a mage behind the forest or building or wall gets hit just as easily as a unit out in the open. I know of people in our region that throw dwellers with impunity whenever they are losing or it is a "bad" matchup (often they are being outplayed).
Second, so much depends on the metagame and who is playing what. We see DE armies running life now, some WE armies (most in the old book) choose life, brettonians run life a lot and sometimes with beasts (and we see that), lizardmen used to often run life and still often run it, high elves certainly run it a lot still, etc.
Third, the issue that is most troubling is that it is not a fun or fair game. The dwellers guy bunkers back enough to avoid combat with the tarrget unit and then throws dwellers at every opportunity. With the way the winds of magic work, the odds are good of getting if off a couple or few times over 5 turns. The game comes down to hoping either getting an IF a couple of times or getting a favorable winds of magic phase where you end up with say 7 dice and the opponent has only 4 dice or 5 dice and you cast dwellers with a fail dispel after burning the scroll. I've played guys that slow play the game, run around and cast dwellers at every opportunity whenever facing armies with elite units and/or characters at S4 or less. Then you hope the key character or one of the key characters in the units dies (which is a big risk and issue for high elf, dark elf, skaven, empire, and still an issue for some WoC, DoC, and other characters) or at least you wipe out with one spell one-third to one-half of most larger elite units. I actually do not mind so much the anti-horde aspect of the spell; my complaint is the killing of the characters in some armies so easily with no look out sir or save of any kind. Too often in my metagame it is a crutch for weak strategic play and a desperation tactic when losing; I have had numerous games decided on couple of dwellers spells getting IF'd and taking out my general and mage as i was winning.
I hear and see the same exact complaint with purple sun but in a different context, it too easily kills large multiple wound monsters, autokills war machines, and tears apart cerain key units in certain armies with low I, including and particularly Ogres, Tomb Kings, Dwarves, some VC builds, and Lizardmen. It is one of the reasons Lizards and Ogres are having a harder time in the metagame, With the WoC Lore of Death Nurgle DP flying around, he can charge into combat, cast purple sun and blow up a big unit and lots of models if it keeps rolling through or across the units with no saves at all. Worse yet, it stays in play. One of out six times you misfire and risk blowing yourself up on the test, but, otherwise, it is too often too big of a nerf to the low I models and units.
This is in contrast with say mindrazor, where you still have to roll to hit, roll to wound, and the opposing models get at least ward saves or final transmuation, still a bit OTT, where multiwound models fail on a 6+ only.
Fourth, dwellers is so threatening because of the combination with throne of vines and the other spells in that lore. If a guy getes 11 or 12 dice and I have only 6 dice, then I see a 3 or 4 dice throne followed by a 6 dice dwellers and followed by something else with the remaing two dice. If you let through throne, then the miscast risk is reduced by 5/6th and six dice at dwellers will IF 26% of the time and I will fail to stop it about 40%+ of the time if not IFed (less if the caster has bonuses to cast or levels of magic over my mage). If I wanted to play Yahtzee, I'd travel to play that game, not WHFB.
Finally, my sense is GW recognizes that some of the big number 6 spells went too far and we see that in the new High Magic and Dark Magic lore number six spells, they certainly can win games but nothing like before because they allow wardd saves (although limited to one per model in dark magic) and a roll to wound in the case of fiery convocation. Also, the fact that the dwellers spell is OP is evidence by the fact that so many tournaments, house rules, and comp systems specifically allow a look out sir for characters as a partial fix for spells like dwellers (and dreaded 13th).

The quandry with the issue is that if one goes to MSU or MMU in builds and spreads out higher value characters and models in the army units, dwellers still does enough damage to some armies and puts at risk enough models that it still is an issue for those armies, the same with purple sun. Going that direction, then infantry armies end up being a lot more vulnerable to the dreaded 13th spell (even if it is harder to cast). If I run a lvl mage in a modest unit of spearmen or something and it gets hit with dwellers, i lose half the unit and 50% of the time I lose the mage. If I lose the mage early, then I have substantially limited magic offense (if I have a lvl 2) and crippled magic defense and the lore of life mage can cast throne of vines and then other spells with a lot more impunity.

Personally, I like the solution of limiting the number of dice to cast at 5 to give opponents a much better chance at stopping the big spells (especially when the winds of magic result in situations like 8 PD against 4 DD) and reducing by some the risk of IF on such spells. I'd much rather have the game focus on spells with utility modest but useful augments, hexes, some magic missiles, and with the direct damage spells toned down (high S but lower hits or lower S and greater number of hits) such that one can choose to dispel the threats and the magic phase is more balanced. Then the magic phase becomes a lot more strategic on the front end and tactical during the game (when do you use the scroll to stop a bigger spell and chance the PD and DD balance? which spells do you let through and which do you stop?; how does one sequence the casting of spells to maximize the spells that get through and throw enough dice to avoid a loss of concentration?).

Phazael
22-05-2014, 23:12
Tinkering with the magic phase is a separate discussion.

On topic, as someone with practical experience facing down the 6 dice dwellers ftw armies fairly often, I can tell you straight up that MSU armies give zero poops about that spell. They get one shot to push irresistible boosted before you have your entire army in range to gang rape the unit the caster is launching these shenanigans from. In all likelihood, you also have chances to gank the wizard with standard hunter units before he gets in range to snipe your wizard. If you cannot wrap your brain around that, its simple enough to plop a fast cav or eagle unit in front of the bunker unit and make the guy waste time sitting in his own deployment zone. There are actual tactical methods to mitigating dwellers, if your army design does not revolve around a single L4 and pals stuffed into one blob while taking turns playing Frisbee with the crown of command.

And lets be realistic here. Outside of World Dragon Banner setups, no one is going to six dice the spell on a coin flip to snipe a single support wizard and part of a unit. This is especially true against MSU armies where the men are cheap and the unit can be hidden away where it will not cough up any points. They are going to do more harm to themselves half of the time. Really, most people moaning in ******** over dwellers are really saying "This one time I got my L4 sniped because I hung it out there and made it a tempting target, then proceeded to get unlucky." Compared to relentless spamming of death snipe spells, Dwellers is far less dangerous to exposed kitted out L4s. I have seen more games tipped by Flesh to Stone than I ever have seen won by dwellers. And I say this as someone who generally hates kill spells.

Vipoid
22-05-2014, 23:31
I can tell you straight up that MSU armies give zero poops about that spell.

Whilst I'm sure that's true, not every army can just play MSU without a hitch.

Also, your posts do seem to imply that the only possible armies are 'MSU army that spends its spare time building orphanages' or 'Death Star fuelled by dead puppies and the stolen dreams of children'. ;)

Phazael
23-05-2014, 00:19
I guess I should also say MMU. Basically, any army with its points and power spread out in any reasonable fashion. For example, an elf army with a few 20-25 man blocks and some support units is going to care a lot less about this spell than the guy who is running Lionstar surrounded by every elven bowman in the land. The former elf army is a lot less abusive and more tactical. Basically, Dwellers punishes you the more you dump points into one basket and I am having a hard time understanding why this is a problem, especially when spells like PSun and Cacobomb can end entire games for people.

Sexiest_hero
23-05-2014, 00:25
You gonna hurt your head banging it against the wall Phazael.

olderplayer
23-05-2014, 03:38
I think what is missed is the Throne plus dwellers combo making the cast nearly riskless and dwellers does a lot more damage to certain lower S armies. The MSU/MMU answer is not viable in some armies and does not address the problem. I had a single lvl 4 with 25 spears and my opponent cast dwellers three turns in a row to avoid losing. On the third try my general&Lvl 4 fails. That is a 400 point swing plus I lost 2/3 of my magic spells and 2 lvls of magic defense. So. I go from winning and just set up to charge and break his mage unit to hitting a wall of flesh to stone and regen with no magic to counter his. One roll of the dice and I go from set up to win to now losing. That is what makes dwellers so unique. What fun is that game? If I had a lookout sir then dwellers is fine and still is potentially op. If I take life I refuse to cast dwellers except if my opponent throws op spells more than once.

Lord Dan
23-05-2014, 03:44
For the most part, I'd be fine if these bomb spells allowed ward saves and only did a single wound. This whole "remove the model" nonsense is out of hand, especially when a lot of these spells can be combined with other spells to tank the stat being tested.

WLBjork
23-05-2014, 08:13
I'm thinking a buy more varied myself Lord Dan.

I'm thinking one that affects all models in a unit, but only inflicts a single wound when it succeeds

One that allows models to be sniped out of a unit

One that takes down monsters

Etc.

Add in a stipulation that the lore must be chosen at the list building stage, and then people will have to think. Do they take the deathstar killer or the monster killer? Or, of course, do they take several L2s in an attempt to get several bomb spells?

theshoveller
23-05-2014, 08:28
Nope, I just like balance. There's no reason why some armies should be particularly vulnerable to one spell (Undead/Ogres/Dwarfs/Saurus/etc and Purple Sun are something like 1/6 or 2/6 survival for the most part), some armies are sort of vulnerable (Elves and Dwellers, which is like 50-50), whilst others have no or little vulnerability (WoC and any of the templates/all models in one unit have a 2/3 survival rate). Make sure that there's a 6th level spell that can counter everything.

All armies should be free to pile all their points into a Death Star, so long as they accept the risk that someone may 6-dice something to try and take it all off.
Final... Transmutation...?

Vipoid
23-05-2014, 10:19
especially when spells like PSun and Cacobomb can end entire games for people.

Well, to be fair, if we nerf one spell, it certainly doesn't mean we can't nerf others too.

Personally, I'd like to see all the remove-from-play spells toned down - not just Dwellers.

Phazael
23-05-2014, 15:54
Theses spells need to exist, frankly. With all of the 3++ rerolling ones and massive point denial deathstars seeing play, there needs to be a counter incentive. And honestly, a decked out wizard costs 200-300 points, nearly triple what most war machines do. Wizards SHOULD be that destructive, and I say this as someone who routinely goes low/no magic at tournaments. What is really missing is the punishment for repeatedly spamming the kill spells, especially at the six dice level. I have said this before, but the table for miscasts should be redone with the worst results at the top and the roll should be a single dice and adding the amount of dice used to cast the spell. That way, some jackwagon who drops six dice on dwellers every turn gets punished for doing it, but the guy who randomly throws boxcars on a routine fireball doesn't lose his only wizard on turn one.

olderplayer
23-05-2014, 16:19
For the most part, I'd be fine if these bomb spells allowed ward saves and only did a single wound. This whole "remove the model" nonsense is out of hand, especially when a lot of these spells can be combined with other spells to tank the stat being tested.

I would suggest that characters get a look out sir generally to such hit all models in unit spells since those spells are like a type of template. In most tournaments, that house rule seems to limit the abuse and damage of dwellers and dreaded 13th. Characters represent such high value targets and can always give up VPs in combat and with character sniping that they need to be protected from such antihorde spells. Similarly, i don't mind allowing a ward save as long as ward saves are not abused (like max ward save of 4+ for certain spells) and perhaps MR should apply to all spells up to a the max ward save.

However, I would not limit spells that hit models to only a single wound. In fact, one of the problems with some template hits now is that they can only cause one wound on multiwound rank and file and monster models, giving units with such models something of an advantage because fewer models are hit and they will take a smaller number of wounds relative to the wounds in the unit.

I can illustrate the problem with the single wound per model hit rule. If one nerfs magic like dwellers and pit of shade and purple sun to max out at a single wound, then units with multiple wounds end up largely impervious to magic. For example, an Ironguts bus might represent 10 Ironguts and 3 characters, that is 30 wounds on core models and a lot of wounds on character models. If you hit the unit with a dwellers and limited to a single wound, the Ironguts take only 10 tests and, with a single wound, can suffer only ten wounds max and, since the fail is on a 5+, really would average only 3.33 avg wounds amount the core models, or a bit more than one Irongut is lost. Assuming the characters are S5, you would maybe average 0.5 wounds on the characters with a single wound limit. At that point, you are probably better off attempting a boosted 2D6 S4 magic missile or something similar.

Now compare that with a white lions horde of 30 white lions and 3 characters. That is 30 tests among the white lions. An average of 10 will fail. Since the cost per wound is about the same in white lions and in Ironguts, a unit of white lions would loose 3 times as many core model wounds and points by comparison.

If the new Dark Magic and High Magic lores are an indication of the direction GW is likely to take in the future, then that would solve some of the issues. I really like the new Strength test vortex in the new Dark Magic black horror. First, the vortex has a risk associated with the misfire. Second, it has random range such that the caster (who really wants to avoid combat) has to get pretty close to reliably cast it. Third, it allows a ward save and, as a template, it allows a look out sir. Fourth, it does not hit every model in the unit. It can be OP if one has a fantastic magic phase and casts word of pain boosted to lower S or an enfeeble to lower S in a unit and then gets off black horror, but most of the time only half of the models hit will die (since the vast majority of models have S3 or greater) even with no ward save.

In fact, I wound argue that fiery convocation is a great example of a high risk/high casting cost and high reward spell that is not OP because it allows for ward and armour saves but the RIP aspect forces the opponent to either stop it or unit up a lot of power dice or something to end it in the next magic phase (Thus helping to shut down opposing magic for one turn.). It punishes single wound hordes but is far less effective against multiple wound hordes.

Purple sun is an issue primarily because some armies and units have very low initiative and one can lower initiative through miasma. That combines with the fact that there are certain casters (Slann in the second rank or Daemon Prince or GUO) that don't mind getting into combat or their units into combat and casting it. It allows no saves upon a failed test and removes the model. As a vortex, a flying DP can get on a flank and run it through much of the army and virtually end the game. If purple sun were remove the model on a 4+ if the model fails the I test or allowed a ward save, then it probably would not be that bad of a spell in the game. Also, the existence of purple sun and lore of death in the game tend to favor units and armies with the combination of high S, T and I, like Warriors of Chaos uniquely enjoy, except for certain monstrous units suhc as Chaos Ogres and Trolls.

I would go so far as to say that one fix would be to make MR a separate save that always applies to hits and effects in the magic phase and to create a "cover save" concept for both shooting and magic. MR confers a cover save up to a max 4+ to units or individual models in units with such MR is a separate save allowing a model in a unit if hit to ignore the effects of the spell for direct damage and magic missiles or the unit to ignore the effects if a hex or vortex instead MR providing a boosted ward save. Similarly, direct damage spells and magic missiles would be subject to additional MR if cast at units out of line of sight (+2 to MR) or more than 50% covered from line of sight (+1 to MR) in order to reflect the possible dissipation of the effects of the magic through obstacles. This would reflect the difficulties in casting through blocking terrain and units at more distant targets.

BTW I'd apply the same cover save concept to non-BS (warmachine) shooting (it is already applied to BS shooting) by effectively allowing a unit behind soft cover to ignore a hit (cover save) on a 6+, or 5+, and hard cover would confer a cover save of 5+ or 4+ but once per unit per shot. That reflects the risk of a cannonball flying through a forest hitting a tree or something else and being stopped or going astray.

To me this all would add a lot of interesting tactical and strategic issues to the game and refocus the game on movement tactics and use of terrain and multiple units to screen units and remove screens, even if it means rolling more dice.

olderplayer
23-05-2014, 16:55
Theses spells need to exist, frankly. With all of the 3++ rerolling ones and massive point denial deathstars seeing play, there needs to be a counter incentive. And honestly, a decked out wizard costs 200-300 points, nearly triple what most war machines do. Wizards SHOULD be that destructive, and I say this as someone who routinely goes low/no magic at tournaments. What is really missing is the punishment for repeatedly spamming the kill spells, especially at the six dice level. I have said this before, but the table for miscasts should be redone with the worst results at the top and the roll should be a single dice and adding the amount of dice used to cast the spell. That way, some jackwagon who drops six dice on dwellers every turn gets punished for doing it, but the guy who randomly throws boxcars on a routine fireball doesn't lose his only wizard on turn one.

I agree heartily with the concept of fixing the miscast table to reflect the number of dice cast as part of the consequence. I really like the steam tank type of table. Throwing two dice and miscasting should not risk blowing up a wizard and three dice should reflect a very low risk of blowing up on a miscast. I would probably prefer though to go back to 7th ed rule that double 1's is a miscast and the spell fails while double 6 is IF. It just makes more sense and changes the risk/reward balance. When my opponent has 12 PD and I have 6 or 7, and he has one of the big spells (I have burned my scroll already), I really am left naked in the magic phase. In a steam tank type of miscast table, throwing six dice results in a miscast and an automatically failed spell 26% of the time. If you created a table where you added a D6 to the number of dice used to cast the spell, then a 9+ or 10+ would be Dimensional Cascade and then rework the table down to say 4 with decreasing consequences at each level. If you want to throw six dice at something, then you take the risk that, if you miscast, the spell does not go off and you have a 33% or 50% risk of Dimensional Cascade. Least bad consequences would be effects like forget the spell cast, take a wound, or lose a level.

The problem with dwellers though is that these fixes will not stop people playing poorly, in a bad matchup, or losing for what ever other reason from desperately throwing six dice every turn to try to change the game. Absent allowing a look out sir, the spell has simply too great of a prospect of taking out a lvl 4 with S3 or a fighting general in some armies at S4 and altering the balance of the game. If one is losing badly and down say, 400 or 500 VPs already and will get tabled in two turns unless one changes the balance of power (killing off the opposing lvl 4 for both the VPs and to kill off opposing magic offensive threats and limit opposing magic defense), then throwing dwellers with better than a 50% probability of it going off is a huge and high reward game changer even if one changes the risks and lowers the odds (like making miscasts on double 1's). Dwellers is potentially a 2 for 1, 3 for 1 or even 4 for 1 game changer; it can effectively cripple certain units (cutting rank and file wounds in half or a third in most instances and causing a panic test if not ITP which by itself is worth much more than the risks of throwing the six dice and miscasting; killing one or more key command or utility characters like a lvl 4 or BSB or general with a reasonably high probability of success; and altering the balance of power in the game going forward if one of the command or utlity characters is lost). This can even occur with final transmutation (which I will cast if my opponent is willing to cast an uber spell) as I have managed with that spell to kill a lvl 4 mage and a BSB and panic a key unit off the table with luck rolls of 6.

I really don't mind someone killing off one-third to one-half of a deathstar or horde unit with dwellers and don't mind repeating the spell to reduce the unit to the point that it can be effectively attacked or the characters lose their look out sirs. Furthermore, soem characcters and the champ in a unit will ultimately fail a look out sir and end up testing, that is fine too. The issue is that rewards to dwellers against character bunker units that are not even deathstars or hordes are too great for the cost and difficulty of casting and miscast risk.

I think most of us agree on the 3+ ward save being an issue, and a separate issue. I was shocked when the new WoC book came out with MoTz giving +1 ward and the cheap Third Eye mutation or gift of chaos in the allowance of chaos mutations and gifts for certain characters. Then, in contrast, they gave a Daemon of Tzeentch a benefit of re-rolling ward save rolls of 1 and channeling attempt rolls of 1, which is a fairly muted benefit compared with the +1 ward save for MoT and the -1 to hit in combat for Nurgle. But that is an issue unique to one army book and one specific choice of combinations of upgrades and optional items on a character model (including Archeon having a 3+ ward) and one other other model (warshrine) in that book. But throwing dwellers at such a character is largely a vain effort if it is the MoTz BSB or Chaos Lord general (most common choices for Motz and Third Eye) unless you manage to cast soulblight or enfeeble first. The solution there is to add spells in the lores that can reduce Ward Saves (like lore of metal can reduce armor saves) and limit ward saves in the game to 4+ period, except for certain special circumstances (like dragonbane gem or something).

Lord Dan
23-05-2014, 17:32
My only concern with that is the fact that with an army like Ogres you have a single dice roll representing 3 wounds. It's a heck of a lot easier to roll a proportionately high number of 5's and 6's on 10 dice than it is on 30 dice, and so in order to wipe out half of the unit of Ironguts you'd need to roll five 5-6's while with the White Lions you'd need to roll 15.

Perhaps the solution, then, is to roll a dice for each wound instead of for each model?

Ultimate Life Form
23-05-2014, 17:47
Perhaps the solution, then, is to roll a dice for each wound instead of for each model?

Which means Ogre characters are basically immune to this spell, putting them at a disproportionate advantage.

Sexiest_hero
23-05-2014, 17:53
Yeah How else is one to curb the Ogre deathstar other than throwing a PS Just wat are my tompkings to do?

theunwantedbeing
23-05-2014, 17:57
Which means Ogre characters are basically immune to this spell, putting them at a disproportionate advantage.

Boo hoo, it's not supposed to be a character sniping spell anyway.

olderplayer
23-05-2014, 18:03
Which means Ogre characters are basically immune to this spell, putting them at a disproportionate advantage.

They would not be immune, just really hard to kill entirely. This would be an interesting solution to the multiwound character problem, albeit requiring a lot more dice rolls. So a unit of thirty white lions would roll 30 dice to test and so would a unit of 10 ironguts and each would take a wound on dwellers on a 5+; same number of starting wounds and same S means same average number of wounds resulting from the spell going off.

Lord Dan
23-05-2014, 18:32
Which means Ogre characters are basically immune to this spell, putting them at a disproportionate advantage.

But shouldn't it be really hard to kill a 5-wound character with a single spell?

Fear Ghoul
23-05-2014, 19:03
But shouldn't it be really hard to kill a 5-wound character with a single spell?

If the spell is hard to cast, then I don't see what the problem with it. Death Stars are already enough of a problem, and I can only see this change making them better.

olderplayer
23-05-2014, 19:14
Yeah How else is one to curb the Ogre deathstar other than throwing a PS Just wat are my tompkings to do?

Let's see: cannon balls, massed BS shooting (which TK can do), unless they have the Maw magic missiles and direct damage spells (which TK can do), pendulum in lore of shadow and purple sun in lore of death still do a lot of damage if characters get a look out sir (which is the solution I would recommend, I don't think GW would ever accept the roll to test per wound idea which is actually kind of an interesting solution to the problem of multiwound model units in deathstars/hordes.). Soulblight and doom and darkness are issues for the deathstar unit (making it easer to kill off with shooting and magic and more likely to panic); slow it up and harass it. It is not like Iron Guts death stars are running over the metagame right now. Also, if you kill enough of the Iron guts, and you can and will with a lot of spells or shooting, the characters will lose their look out sir rolls eventually and be able to be targetted directly and killed off and the unit will eventually get below 25%. I've always been a lot more worried about those Ironblasters, mournfang cav getting a charge off, and leadbelchers ripping through my units.

Sexiest_hero
23-05-2014, 19:21
You are dealing with a very fast gut star with the slowest army in the game, I personally don't use those spells unless I'm facing an "Unkillable" something or another. You won't kill enough of the Iron guts with bs shooting unless you are using the Kalidia death star and then you are just adding to the issue. I mean They could not run the gut-star but they do, so they catch the sun.

leopard
23-05-2014, 19:52
Could live with such spells causing a wound, not the 'removed from play' stuff, but think there should be a way to avoid ward saves

Von Wibble
23-05-2014, 20:05
For the most part, I'd be fine if these bomb spells allowed ward saves and only did a single wound. This whole "remove the model" nonsense is out of hand, especially when a lot of these spells can be combined with other spells to tank the stat being tested.

This exactly.

Katastrophe
23-05-2014, 20:43
There is nothing at all wrong with those spells and the massive damage they do. The real culprit is that you can 6 dice spells with any mage. I would prefer casting dice be number of levels + 1 + any magic items. This would make 5 dice the normal max and no level 1-2 running around casting the most powerful spells in the game without failing almost aways in the attempt.

As it stands, there is a real easy way to not be destroyed by the #6 spells and that is to not run busses and stars and to spread your characters across smaller units. Players seem to want their cake and eat it too, they want large units, filled with their characters and they don't want them to die from magic or shooting.

Leogun_91
23-05-2014, 20:59
Well, to be fair, if we nerf one spell, it certainly doesn't mean we can't nerf others too.

Personally, I'd like to see all the remove-from-play spells toned down - not just Dwellers.I'd be fine with final transmutation and curse of the years being kept with their power being the general point aimed for with such spells.
Deathstars I have an easier time dealing with, be it a trail of warhounds, a trail of wolfriders or some other throw away units available to my army, I just need to keep them busy while I slaughter the rest, the problem comes from when the same deathstars have the ability to throw uberspells which brings me to the problem of uberspells. Dwellers tend to end the game for me through one or two castings when my opponent uses it, either because I lose half a unit or more when he only loses a quarter of one from my spells if I'm lucky or because a general, bsb or hierophant got dragged to his doom. Had that spell only been useful against deathstars there would be no problem but that is not the case, it is good against anything.

Sexiest_hero
23-05-2014, 21:53
there are two reasons Deathstars and the gut star in general are so popular. You can win by points denial AND wrecking any unit you face in combat. First I can't take big mosters or one iron blaster shot means the ogre player can sit back and win unless I come to him in a hopeless battle. Or I can add skeleton horse men who still can't march and try to pick out points from his gut star, mourn fangs or iron blasters, but then I've had to tailor my whole list just to fight a losing battle I can't hope to win. OR I can punish him for putting 1000 points with all his heroes and lords into one unit with a simple spell. I mean it would suck so bad if they didn't have their caster bsb fighty lord and best combat block in one nice little package.

Lord Dan
23-05-2014, 22:36
If the spell is hard to cast, then I don't see what the problem with it. Death Stars are already enough of a problem, and I can only see this change making them better.
Hard to cast? I don't think your opponents are six-dice-irresistible-forcing their spells against you enough.

A bigger problem is the damage these spells do against non-death star units. If I have a Vampire Lord in a unit of Ghouls, his fate and the fate of the game shouldn't hinge on not rolling a 6.

Ultimate Life Form
23-05-2014, 22:39
Hard to cast? I don't think your opponents are six-dice-irresistible-forcing their spells against you enough.

I'm trying this with my Slann whenever I get the chance, but oddly, he seems to refuse doing this and always hits the bare minimum casting value required. He is a very stable Slann indeed.

Vipoid
23-05-2014, 22:59
A bigger problem is the damage these spells do against non-death star units. If I have a Vampire Lord in a unit of Ghouls, his fate and the fate of the game shouldn't hinge on not rolling a 6.

Yeah, as a VC player, this is something I really hate.

Granted, the chance of a VL/SGK dying is only 1/6... but it basically amounts to a 1/6 of just losing the game outright.

Phazael
23-05-2014, 23:14
On the other hand, commit that unit to combat early, and Dwellers ceases to be a concern. In fact, it is generally less of a concern for VC than most armies because of the abundant methods to return troops to the table. It is certainly a lot less likely to cost you the game than a decked out death caster spamming the snipe spells 2-3 per turn over the course of a game.

ewar
24-05-2014, 01:27
it is good against anything.

Except for small units, single models and anything with S5+. It sounds like you've had a few bad experiences against the spell - have you tried doing anything different, like moving your mages out of the units? Taking smaller units with fewer characters in etc?

As Phazael has spelled out pretty clearly, Dwellers is quite easily avoided, unlike the Flying Death caster spamming purple sun, which can affect multiple units. I once had Teclis (old book) throw a Sun across my Tomb King army taking out 6 chariots, 1 Necrosphinx and a warpshinx. Dwellers is nothing compared to that. If BoTWD exists and HE players insist on Lionstars, then Dwellers needs to stay.


If I have a Vampire Lord in a unit of Ghouls, his fate and the fate of the game shouldn't hinge on not rolling a 6.

Would you complain if your vampire had a 2++ against killing blow and failed it? Same odds, but with Dwellers the guy needs to get the power dice, cast the spell, not have it dispelled/scrolled and then for you to fail your S5 test. I can't be bothered to work out the averages on that, but it's not a very likely outcome.

Try playing tomb kings where the hierophant is slower, weaker and can't be supplanted with another mage to prevent crumble. So honestly, I'm not over-flowing with sympathy for you :p

Sinsigel
24-05-2014, 01:38
To be frank, although I fear dwellers greatly, it certainly isn't insurmountable when it's cast by elves, bretonnia or lizardmen.

But when empire with 6 demigryphs, 2 steam tanks, 2 great cannons and helblaster volley gun(at 2.5K) has Lv4 wizard casting dwellers,
that's nowhere comparable to the armies I've forementioned. Staying out of dwellers' range means more shooting for the empire.
And even if non-deathstar unit carrying character(say, 10-model strong cavalry unit or 20-ish infantry) gets hit by dwellers and stay 'relatively' unscathed,
further shooting from empire will take away look out sir roll, while cannons snipe characters.

And frankly, with Lv4 removed by dwellers(which happens very very often), I don't think there are many ways to tackle the empire list save counterfire from your own artillery.
Even then this is easier said than done, when there are two 10-wound cannons and 2 regular cannons in the empire side.
And this was the very reason why I started this topic. But perhaps I should have mentioned it in the first place to avoid misunderstanding......

Lord Dan
24-05-2014, 04:52
Would you complain if your vampire had a 2++ against killing blow and failed it?

It's not at all the same, because against KB I actually have a say in the matter - I can position my Vampire to steer clear of anything with KB (as any smart VC player will do), and if all else fails my powerhouse combat character will at least get to strike and defend himself before dying. Against a IF spell what can you do but stand there and take it?

Phazael
24-05-2014, 18:27
Well most empire armies in tournaments lately have been doing the light council thing, as its more powerful in general and good in the current meta. But really, what you described is not much different than a heavens caster in a shooting army dropping rocks on you all game and no one is complaining about comet. At least with dwellers, you can park the casters out of range, unless he is going to march his wizard in close (very unlikely) to try and snipe you.

And Dan, you have plenty of say with dwellers. It has been pointed out in this thread how to defend against it. In fact, you have more say in defending against Dwellers than you would against Death Sniping/PSun, Final Trans, or Pit, all of which have superior range. Frankly, if you are the kind of VC player who sits back spamming LD bomb while screaming people off the board, then it is hard to be sympathetic for you getting dwellers cast on you. So the short answer is, if you choose not to position correctly or get into combat more expediently, then yes you get to stand there and eat that poop sandwitch, with all the garnishments. Frankly, cannons and double Terrorgiest render a lot more armies unplayable than Dwellers ever will. Until Matt Ward Save Elves get toned down a bit and 3++rr1s guys and the crown of command cease to be, the kill spells are a needed aspect of the game.

Lord Dan
24-05-2014, 19:39
Well most empire armies in tournaments lately have been doing the light council thing, as its more powerful in general and good in the current meta. But really, what you described is not much different than a heavens caster in a shooting army dropping rocks on you all game and no one is complaining about comet. At least with dwellers, you can park the casters out of range, unless he is going to march his wizard in close (very unlikely) to try and snipe you.
Are you talking to me? Because the reason no one complains about comet is due to both its random detonation and the fact that it doesn't auto-delete 400 point character models.



And Dan, you have plenty of say with dwellers. It has been pointed out in this thread how to defend against it.
I haven't seen any suggestions other than "dispel it" which obviously isn't an option in the case of the ever-popular tournament standard "SIX DICE EVERYTHING".



In fact, you have more say in defending against Dwellers than you would against Death Sniping/PSun, Final Trans, or Pit, all of which have superior range.
Frankly, this isn't a discussion about Dwellers. It's a discussion about any "you die with no saves on a roll of x" spells, and I would rank those which hit all models in a unit as being the hardest to deal with.



Frankly, if you are the kind of VC player who sits back spamming LD bomb while screaming people off the board, then it is hard to be sympathetic for you getting dwellers cast on you.
When did I say I did that? I said my Vampire Lord was in a unit of Ghouls, and if you must know I don't even take a Terrorgheist in my list.



So the short answer is, if you choose not to position correctly or get into combat more expediently, then yes you get to stand there and eat that poop sandwitch, with all the garnishments.
Yes, because Vampires are notorious for taking as long as possible to get to combat. :rolleyes: So your argument is that if my Vampire Lord gets blasted off the table due to IF'd Dwellers Below on turn 2, the problem isn't that the spell is overpowered but that I didn't try hard enough to get into combat?



Frankly, cannons and double Terrorgiest render a lot more armies unplayable than Dwellers ever will. Until Matt Ward Save Elves get toned down a bit and 3++rr1s guys and the crown of command cease to be, the kill spells are a needed aspect of the game.
I never said double cannons and double Terrogheists weren't a problem, and there are plenty of other threads discussing those very issues. Arguing that bomb spells aren't that bad because dual Terrorgheists exist is as much of a fallacy as arguing that bomb spells are necessary because deathstars exist. Fix deathstars.

Leogun_91
24-05-2014, 20:12
Except for small units, single models and anything with S5+. It sounds like you've had a few bad experiences against the spell - have you tried doing anything different, like moving your mages out of the units? Taking smaller units with fewer characters in etc?Mages out of the unit is not a perfect idea with cannons and luminarks around which is what I'm facing when I meet the opponent using this spell a lot. I play mainly horde armies (as I prefer that) but even when I play my dwarfs of warriors of chaos the spell tends to do more damage than the alternatives (with the exception of purple sun but another spell also being OP doesn't mean this one isn't). Small units (unless also high strength) still lose half the unit statistically and will thus reliably force panic on pretty much anything, with a fair shot at killing any character in said unit it's a decent spell even then. Single models with S5+ are bad targets I admit but they are pretty much the exception.

Forever_Lona
26-05-2014, 00:35
To be perfectly honest I don't see why you *need* doom spells to deal with deathstars. I run a Savage Orc deathstar horde and rarely lose it to doom spells - I have more trouble with players that know what they are doing and use clever redirection and combo charges. A good deathstar player will have measures in place to deal with enemy wizards and protect their big block of points.

If you're relying on doom spells to deal with a deathstar you need to re-evaluate your strategy.

Sexiest_hero
26-05-2014, 00:42
A good deathstar player will deal with chaff as well. You don't need it to finish the unit, but 20 Savage orcs are nowhere near the bs level of 40. Yeah you could Feed them units to redirect, but I'd rather not throw away units when I can just toss a spell to even up the fight and redirect that huge unit of trolls or vice versa. Also if you can kill the savage shaman you neuter their wardsave.

olderplayer
26-05-2014, 01:16
I think what the don't tone it down advocates of dwellers do not seem to understand is that casting dwellers and killing the lvl 4 mage or general of you opponent (and one-third or half of his primary unit as well) usually is an automatic win on a single dice throw. That's bad game design; an issue I have had with GW rules (Reign of Chaos table; and the no save and no look out sir spells). Too many rationalization and excuses and not often consideration of how it feels to lose in turn one or two when dwellers takes out one's lvl 4 mage (possibly also taking the general or BSB with it). It takes no skill to throw six dice and only modest strategy (knowing how to get your mage just within 24" of the target unit). It would be fine if just an anti-horde or deathstar spell; but it is often not, it is really used as a cheap way to win. In that sense, IMO it is a bad game for all. When I throw final transmutation to cut down a deathstar or horde unit, I feel bad if I happen to also get lucky and take out a key character. That was not my intention; my intention was to get past a BOTWD or a rediculously high ward save on a unit or to cut down an over-sized unit by about a third. It turns the game into lucky dice rolling; not an interesting strategic/tactical battle. Anybody who thinks that throwing 5 or 6 dice at a spell and taking out the mage or general and turning a loss into a win or a close game into an autowin simply is not being honest. It may be fun for them; it is almost never fun for the opponent. There are simply too many battles decided in the first two turns (before combat occurs) on a single successful dwellers six dice casting attempt. The fact that ETc and most tournies modify dwellers should be enough to suggest that it needs to be toned down.

Dwellers is different. If you six dice it, you have about a 50% chance of getting it off if your opponent has no scroll. Furthermore, the relative risk is minimal if you got off throne of vines (which often happens when you have say 9+ PD and your opponent has only 6 or less) and not that big if you miscast (1/12th chance of losing the mage; some risk of losing a wound; 1/6th chance of losing spells and levels). It is a lot more common and easy to get the PD, than some have suggested.

If dwellers were really an anti-horde spell and gave a look out sir to character models, that would be acceptable. That is the fix most people put in place and it should be there for a reason. However, when the look out sir is not in place, I have seen opponents cast dwellers three turns in a row just to take out my lvl 4 general with S3 and ignore a much larger combat unit.
The idea that dwellers is easy to avoid is a joke. It is a direct damage spell, so it requires no line of sight and can be cast out of combat. If your opponent plays an infantry based list and you bunker the mage and are decent at using redirection and chaff, the lvl 4 mage is not threatened until turn 3 or 4. A good player can generally ensure that their mage is just within 24" and able to hit the chosen target and the opponent is often having to move forward to get their mage within range to cast, especially if mounted on fast cav and in a fast cav unit.

Sexiest_hero
26-05-2014, 04:08
If you are taking and throwing Dwellers at random units you arn't any better than the gut-star player. If however you are going up against a horde of witch elves it's the only ay to deal with them. there is a reason VC WOC and Ogres do very well and non can take lore of life. Elves and Empire run lore of light. Dark elves run shadow or dark. If every top army ran lore of life and dwellers like the beginning of 8th I'd almost agree with you. I know good and well how it feels to lose a lvl 4 as a TK player and a VC player. and trust me it affects them a lot more than any other army. I also know what happens if that blender lord and BK bus make it into combat. Nobody feels bad if my lord gets sniped off of his dragon, or hit with spirit leech. Mornfang spam and harlberdiers players don't feel bad when they spam those units, Tzeentch chosen star of old or the plaguebearer spam of today don't feel bad when they plunk down a unit of 40+ So when I fight armies like that they get the 6th spell. I think you issue is more with the player than the game.

olderplayer
26-05-2014, 16:04
No the issue is with the game and game design. It is not an accident that many tournaments and events and the ETC rules allow look out sirs to characters (or at least two characters in a unit) in units targetedt by dwellers or generally any spell that hits all models (or requires all models to test or die). The consensus on this is pretty overwhelming. Yes, some players, like me and some others, will take lore of life (for the lore attribute plus throne, flesh to stone and earthblood), and refuse to cast dwellers unless the target is an OP unit or else characters can avoid with a look out sir or fail only on a 6), the opponent shows a willingness to take and cast a similar OP 6th spell, the spell is modified to provide a look our sire of modified ruie for characters, or if the opponent runs something like the old chosen star. The issue is with the test and no save and no look out sir on characters. There are simply too many instances where that results in a bad game for someone and requiring all players to "play fair" is not realistic. It is the same reason i despise the Regin of Chaos table doing random damage to and able to occasionally take out whole units just on a lucky or unlucky dice roll.

ewar
28-05-2014, 23:00
No the issue is with the game and game design. It is not an accident that many tournaments and events and the ETC rules allow look out sirs to characters (or at least two characters in a unit) in units targetedt by dwellers or generally any spell that hits all models (or requires all models to test or die). The consensus on this is pretty overwhelming. Yes, some players, like me and some others, will take lore of life (for the lore attribute plus throne, flesh to stone and earthblood), and refuse to cast dwellers unless the target is an OP unit or else characters can avoid with a look out sir or fail only on a 6), the opponent shows a willingness to take and cast a similar OP 6th spell, the spell is modified to provide a look our sire of modified ruie for characters, or if the opponent runs something like the old chosen star. The issue is with the test and no save and no look out sir on characters. There are simply too many instances where that results in a bad game for someone and requiring all players to "play fair" is not realistic. It is the same reason i despise the Regin of Chaos table doing random damage to and able to occasionally take out whole units just on a lucky or unlucky dice roll.

I don't disagree with you generally and I'd be happy to have the character sniping element taken out of Dwellers, but then I think there also needs to be a general restriction on characters in units - WL hordes with multiple mages and BOTWD spring to mind. It's simply too easy for some armies to points deny by tanking up 1000pts of characters in a single massive unit.

Anyway, who even takes Dwellers any more? I can't even remember the last time I saw it used and I loved my Life Slann with the old book. I know he was unfashionable but he worked great. All the cool kids these days are spamming Death snipers.

Maoriboy007
28-05-2014, 23:47
Dwellers is particularly bad for not allowing Look out sir, but all the "die with no save" spells need a fix,
I can't understand the advice to simply "avoid" the spell. If some one wants to cast it at a unit, 24" has a pretty good coverage, any unit staying far back enough out of range is pretty much staying out of the game which is a victory in itself.
I find the argument that it is an anti deathstar spell an odd one. Its not that discerning , its an anti unit spell and a character sniper. There tends to be an odd argument that one of the good things about 8th is that it brought back/in big armies/units/hordes (not that I agree) while simultaneously cheering on these spells that would specifically discourage them. Also , the definition of a horde/deathstar seems to be rather nebulous seeming to include "any unit with a character and more than 10 models" at times. These spells should have a high damage potential, but that potential is too fixed. Yes tone it down IMO, Look out sirs and D3 wounds no armour would still be brutal.

SteveW
28-05-2014, 23:54
@maoriboy, avoiding it isn't hard at all. You just need the tools in your list to do it. Like redirecting a frenzied unit it comes down to managing his Los and distance while keeping out of range.

Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

gingersmali
29-05-2014, 00:23
My suggestion would just be remove the boosted range.

I see the need for "killer spells" but i agree it is a pain when you literally can do anything to avoid it.

That said as a Orc player i really don't care, more worried about +4T.

gingersmali
29-05-2014, 00:25
@maoriboy, avoiding it isn't hard at all. You just need the tools in your list to do it. Like redirecting a frenzied unit it comes down to managing his Los and distance while keeping out of range.

Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

how do you avoid dwellers on you main combat unit? back line it and keep it out the game? Personally I'd say it is nothing like redirecting frenzied units at all.

SteveW
29-05-2014, 00:27
how do you avoid dwellers on you main combat unit? back line it and keep it out the game? Personally I'd say it is nothing like redirecting frenzied units at all.




throw a unit in its face to redirect it or charge it. Also, giving your opponent first turn helps.





Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

WhispersofBlood
29-05-2014, 01:27
how do you avoid dwellers on you main combat unit? back line it and keep it out the game? Personally I'd say it is nothing like redirecting frenzied units at all.

1) Identify your obvious dwellers target

2) As a direct damage spell it require forward arc

3) position the target in such a way that the enemy must turn to target the model or unit he wants

4) place a unit of your own to threaten what would become his new flank

Now it becomes risk reward does he risk his flank, for a 1/4 chance at an IR? Personally I wouldn't. But then I take lores and armies wit more flexibility than that. Your opponent might need to in which case you use your movement phase to punish him.

In a way it isn't much different than the through process for dealing with powerful frenzied units.

Maoriboy007
29-05-2014, 02:04
??? These arguments don't make any sense, they assume a lot of simplicity from your opponent, you have 24" to cross unopposed before he can use any such tactic whereas he has 24" of free space to work with to start. Youre also assuming he doesn't have redirecting forces of his own, he can hide behind a unit and smite his target from afar he doesn't need to charge some redirecting unit, he simply needs to reform in the direction he truly wants , cast his spell and send his own chaff to deal with yours & if he is forcing you to stay 24" from his main line its a victory in itself . The point is you can't simply "avoid" the range of a 24" spell without probably putting the target unit out of effective play (= win to Dwellers)

KalEf
29-05-2014, 02:27
For the most part, I'd be fine if these bomb spells allowed ward saves and only did a single wound. This whole "remove the model" nonsense is out of hand, especially when a lot of these spells can be combined with other spells to tank the stat being tested.

I'm going to have to go with dan on this one (I realize I'm not the first lol). As I said on the other thread, Having spells that can win the game round 1 made my friends quit.

For Me
the fact that some armies don't have many magical attacks, does not make BotWD balanced. The fact that an unkillable DP could end up on a unit of slaves all game or attached to the BotWD does not make me think he is balanced. Because you "may" not manage to get your warriors a 3++ does not make that ridiculousness balanced. Arguments that assume your opponent is an idiot and unable to move his own troops, do not persuade me personally.

A well placed dwellers in 8th can do more damage than a decked out unit of blood knights in 7th

For Me
These big spells should do one test per wound the model has. Failed tests would cause a wound that Ignores all saves not granted by magic resistance... I'd be ok with that and might still have friends playing :)

KalEf
29-05-2014, 02:30
??? These arguments don't make any sense, they assume a lot of simplicity from your opponent, you have 24" to cross unopposed before he can use any such tactic whereas he has 24" of free space to work with to start. Youre also assuming he doesn't have redirecting forces of his own, he can hide behind a unit and smite his target from afar he doesn't need to charge some redirecting unit, he simply needs to reform in the direction he truly wants , cast his spell and send his own chaff to deal with yours & if he is forcing you to stay 24" from his main line its a victory in itself . The point is you can't simply "avoid" the range of a 24" spell without probably putting the target unit out of effective play (= win to Dwellers)

Dear maoriboy, I knew your culture had fine warriors but I didn't know they had ninjas ;)

WhispersofBlood
29-05-2014, 02:41
??? These arguments don't make any sense, they assume a lot of simplicity from your opponent, you have 24" to cross unopposed before he can use any such tactic whereas he has 24" of free space to work with to start. Youre also assuming he doesn't have redirecting forces of his own, he can hide behind a unit and smite his target from afar he doesn't need to charge some redirecting unit, he simply needs to reform in the direction he truly wants , cast his spell and send his own chaff to deal with yours & if he is forcing you to stay 24" from his main line its a victory in itself . The point is you can't simply "avoid" the range of a 24" spell without probably putting the target unit out of effective play (= win to Dwellers)

So you're saying you need to play the game... Killing chaff, managing ranges, winning the movement phase. Sounds like the sort of game I would be interested in playing. Also I didn't assume or suggest anywhere to stay out of 24", in fact I encourage getting in the casters face. Don't let fear control your actions, he's likely going to find a way to cast the spell anyway since he's decided to include the lore.

Anyway this ignores they whole point as test or die spells have pretty much fallen into two uses as the edition has rolled on and massive units have fanished. Deterent to large units of expensive models, and a deterrent to stacking characters and character effects on to one unit. If I look across the table and don't see these options more often than not I don't even take these spells.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath
29-05-2014, 02:48
I really don't understand what you guys are whining about. Dwellers is a spell with short range that only affects a single unit, and sits in a very underwhelming lore in general. The chance of sniping out a character is low, and will cost your opponent nearly his entire magic phase. It might even cost him his own wizard (because you should be dispelling Throne of Vines anyways, since it's a force multiplier and the rest of his spells are only mediocre without it).

Yeah you "can't defend against it," but it's pretty hard to defend against a lot of things coming at you. Warhammer is like chess: you have to accept some losses on your road to victory. If losing a character early on to dwellers is so crippling to your battleplan then you'd better go back to the drawing board and build an army that isn't so easy to dismantle.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath
29-05-2014, 02:50
These big spells should do one test per wound the model has. Failed tests would cause a wound that Ignores all saves not granted by magic resistance... I'd be ok with that and might still have friends playing :)

Why, so that you BotWD deathstar can remain invulnerable? So that your vampire with a 4++ MR(2) can be immune to everything as well?

These spells are just fine as they are.

Maoriboy007
29-05-2014, 04:53
Dear maoriboy, I knew your culture had fine warriors but I didn't know they had ninjas ;) In my neck of the woods those ninja's would be wielding broken bottles :D

So you're saying you need to play the game... Killing chaff, managing ranges, winning the movement phase. Sounds like the sort of game I would be interested in playing.I'm saying its a one sided fight , your opponent doesn't have to move much at all, he holds the sword of Damocles while you have to do all the work and hurl yourself at him. It allows him to dicatate your game, again a victory in itself.

Also I didn't assume or suggest anywhere to stay out of 24", in fact I encourage getting in the casters face. Don't let fear control your actions, he's likely going to find a way to cast the spell anyway since he's decided to include the lore..IN other words, you don't avoid the spell at all, but take the consequences. All I'm saying is that you can't just "avoid" the spell, as is simply thrown out there.

Anyway this ignores they whole point as test or die spells have pretty much fallen into two uses as the edition has rolled on and massive units have vanished. Deterent to large units of expensive models, and a deterrent to stacking characters and character effects on to one unit. If I look across the table and don't see these options more often than not I don't even take these spells.So in your opinion is 8th good because it brought back 'Big" armies or because it now discourages them?

I really don't understand what you guys are whining about. Dwellers is a spell with short range that only affects a single unit, and sits in a very underwhelming lore in general.really? Life is a pretty good lore, sure it has its dud spells but most lores do. Vines and Dwellers are pretty fantastic the Toughness and raising spell aren't too shabby either.

The chance of sniping out a character is low, and will cost your opponent nearly his entire magic phase. It might even cost him his own wizard (because you should be dispelling Throne of Vines anyways, since it's a force multiplier and the rest of his spells are only mediocre without it).. Actually the chance of sniping a character is pretty much the same as his chance of passing the test, better odds than most, as well as beating up the unit.

Yeah you "can't defend against it," but it's pretty hard to defend against a lot of things coming at you. Warhammer is like chess: you have to accept some losses on your road to victory. If losing a character early on to dwellers is so crippling to your battleplan then you'd better go back to the drawing board and build an army that isn't so easy to dismantle.Its not that its hard to defend against, its that there is no defence. Why have magic resistance if it doesn't , say, resist magic. Combat allows plenty of saves, even cannons allow ward saves and do multiple wounds. "Pass or Die" things tend to be exceptions and not particularly good ones at that. Allowing wards would still make these spells brutal, just not overly so.
Chess is fairly balanced with the skill of the players deciding the game. Warhammer has some luck thrown in as well, but the game should be as balanced as possible, there is nothing wrong with toning these spells down just a little to balance the game.

Why, so that you BotWD deathstar can remain invulnerable? So that your vampire with a 4++ MR(2) can be immune to everything as well?These spells are just fine as they are.What about the TK hierophant? The Empire general or Wizard? The Goblin Shaman? These are far more vunerable yet not nearly as overpowered. Two wrongs don't make a right , in fact a Vampire player might sweat a little when the spell is cast , but he's far more likely to pass the test then your average hero of Wizard who are just as good targets as well as any unit they happen to be in.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath
29-05-2014, 05:08
Its not that its hard to defend against, its that there is no defence. Why have magic resistance if it doesn't , say, resist magic. Combat allows plenty of saves, even cannons allow ward saves and do multiple wounds. "Pass or Die" things tend to be exceptions and not particularly good ones at that. Allowing wards would still make these spells brutal, just not overly so.
Chess is fairly balanced with the skill of the players deciding the game. Warhammer has some luck thrown in as well, but the game should be as balanced as possible, there is nothing wrong with toning these spells down just a little to balance the game.
What about the TK hierophant? The Empire general or Wizard? The Goblin Shaman? These are far more vunerable yet not nearly as overpowered. Two wrongs don't make a right , in fact a Vampire player might sweat a little when the spell is cast , but he's far more likely to pass the test then your average hero of Wizard who are just as good targets as well as any unit they happen to be in.

Life is mediocre because it doesn't really offer you any new tools, and isn't very good without Throne of Vines (which everyone just dispels anyways). Shadow has a toolkit that lets helps you take down threats you otherwise couldn't. Light has banishment and stuff to help you kill enemies as well. Heavens has rerolls, can take out fliers, break up castles with comet, break enemies with iceshard blizzard. Metal helps you hit and shreds models with high armour. Fire has lots of magic missiles for taking on light troops like elves. Death has soulblight to debuff enemies killing power AND make them squishier, snipes to take out their characters, D&D to help break their units in combat, and purple sun when all else fails.

Life just...makes your guys a little harder to kill, plus dwellers. If your army wasn't going to do it before, it's probably not going to do it with life. There are some builds that work well with it, but generally there are going to be better. It's really just a crutch for people who don't like taking models off the table, plus "6-dice dwellers."

KalEf
29-05-2014, 05:38
Why, so that you BotWD deathstar can remain invulnerable? So that your vampire with a 4++ MR(2) can be immune to everything as well?

These spells are just fine as they are.

lol Wow just wow, apparently something must have hit home. NO, for the reasons I plainly stated. Chief among them being; it has been poorly designed and people quit playing the game. These spells are terrible the way they are, so is BotWD! That is the state of things. Bringing up other bad decisions they've made, doesn't make me trust their judgement... also stated in my previous post. I don't care much for ward saves better than 4+ being in the game in general. Also BotWD would offer 0 save in this scenario and the vampire would have a 5+ ... I realize the people who bothered staying around, will be amongst the people who like the way the game plays now, but please read a little before you are religiously dismissive.

Someone will have to remind me how much of chess is done during the movement phase, jockeying for position for later rounds? Also what's the charging bonus in chess, and what are the odds your queen can just remove the other side's back row on turn 1?... ...

dooms33ker
29-05-2014, 07:12
Dwellers Below is not the monkey wrench in the meta some might make it seem. It is a spell designed to counterbalance the strengthening of infantry and the proliferation of large deathstar units this edition, and it does its job fairly well in many cases, though not all.

Used against glass cannons like Witch Elves, Dwellers is an indispensable asset, but against many other prominent and meta-changing units the spell's efficacy is rather overstated. Life's posterboy for magic dominance will cripple a unit and kill the odd character or two, yes, but Purple Sun stopping a crucial movement and the mindrazor mindraping a unit in combat will win you games. But even those spells shouldn't prove an insurmountable challenge for a canny general leading an army of more than a handful of units, where the outcome of one charge or combat won't dictate the outcome of the entire battle.

Were today six months after 8th Ed. launched I probably would have agreed with the OP and lamented most if not all the big nuke spells, but four years later a lot has changed, and our mentality must change with it. If you want your games to devolve into pushing forward two giant blocks, and smashing them into your opponent's two giant blocks, then it serves you right when dwellers takes half your army out in one shot. But the reality is that even if dwellers didn't exist, you'd likely not make it to the top tables with such a set up anyways.

If I absolutely had to make a change to the big nuke spells, I would simply dissolve their boosted versions, or limit boosted versions to level 3 and 4 wizards who actually care about miscasting and blowing up themselves and half their unit.

SteveW
29-05-2014, 07:23
This thread is funny. I'm betting the people that don't like dwellers also fall into the category of people that think which elves are a good unit.

Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

Lord Dan
29-05-2014, 07:34
This thread is funny. I'm betting the people that don't like dwellers also fall into the category of people that think which elves are a good unit.

Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

...is your argument that Witch Elves are not a good unit? Because if so, I'm pretty sure most metas would rate that statement somewhere on the sanity level of "The BoTWD is so over-priced..."

SteveW
29-05-2014, 07:43
...is your argument that Witch Elves are not a good unit? Because if so, I'm pretty sure most metas would rate that statement somewhere on the sanity level of "The BoTWD is so over-priced..."






no, they are not a good unit at all. To make them have better survivability than a night goblin you have sink hundreds of points into a canon magnet. To make them even worse, dwellers is tailor made to kill them.



Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

Snake1311
29-05-2014, 10:15
no, they are not a good unit at all. To make them have better survivability than a night goblin you have sink hundreds of points into a canon magnet. To make them even worse, dwellers is tailor made to kill them.

Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

Or you could just take units of 10-14 with a musician only, like a normal person. Their strength comes from their front rank dishing out stupid amount of attacks and wiping or severly denting a similarly-pointed enemy unit before they get to swing back; not grinding in massive blocks.

And this is yet again completely irrelevant to the dwellers problem, which is the fact that is has a 50-50 chance to instagib the enemy wizard sitting on the other side of the table (24" is not short range) in a bunker supposed to defending him (because no look out), behind their own units and maybe even out of line of sight (because direct damage).

Removing its boosted version is actually quite reasonable as a fix too.

ewar
29-05-2014, 14:10
Also BotWD would offer 0 save in this scenario

Actually, in your example it would offer a 2++ to the unit if you're allowing ward saves.

I have played a lot of 8th edition and in all that time I can count only 2 or 3 games where I felt it was over by turn 2. Those were: my army got purple sun enfilade from flying vampire which killed about 70% of the army. Another time I cast Dwellers on Teclis, he survived and I used Cupped Hands to bounce a Dimensional Cascade onto him and the third time my army was hit with Screaming Skulls in turn 1 and I lost about 4 units by panicking off the board. That is out of probably 100+ games.

Maybe your friends should try playing it instead or reading about it? Honestly, I think you'd be surprised. Not many people run massive units of infantry any more.


IN other words, you don't avoid the spell at all, but take the consequences. All I'm saying is that you can't just "avoid" the spell, as is simply thrown out there.

True, you can't really avoid it, but there are many ways to minimise it's impact and that's how you should think about it. I used to run Life A LOT and there were many games were I would fail to cast, it would be dispelled or I just wouldn't have enough PD to get it off reliably. 75% of the time on 6 dice your opponent can just scroll it. I don't know where people are getting the idea that it can just be cast every single turn with impunity.


This thread is funny. I'm betting the people that don't like dwellers also fall into the category of people that think which elves are a good unit.

So speaketh the Warhammer hipster. It is of course possible that some people think Dwellers isn't all that and Witch Elves are also a great unit.


And this is yet again completely irrelevant to the dwellers problem, which is the fact that is has a 50-50 chance to instagib the enemy wizard

Are people actually running Life to do this though? You're better off spamming Spirit Leech and the other death snipes as they are much lower risk and also are great against single models like Chimeras/DPs which Dwellers sucks at.

If you want sniping there are better, lower risk and more cost effective options. Which is why Death is so ubiquitous now where those armies have the option.

HelloKitty
29-05-2014, 14:37
It does not have a lot of experience with the fantasy-game but the creatures it sees playing it like to run two really big filthy units and thats about it.

Is this then not normal for other creatures?

It did watch a purple star spell destroy an opposing army in one casting because the one army was a giant unit and another big unit and the star thing went through both of these units and destroyed a lot of plastic-creatures. The thing running the army almost flipped the table in rage, and so fantasy-game is not very popular where this one is though this one would like to learn more. It has found campaign rules it likes from a not-friend.

KalEf
29-05-2014, 14:53
Actually, in your example it would offer a 2++ to the unit if you're allowing ward saves.


Failed tests would cause a wound that Ignores all saves not granted by magic resistance...

Does the BotWD offer actual MR I'm not aware of??? I'll have to read it again I must have missed that part... because the regular 2++ ward save is not granted by MR. Unless you're specifically trying to reading it in a way that allows you to claim that... Instead of the -actual save- any type of save that MR gives can be taken and they do give ward saves so then you can take the ward save even though it is not granted by MR. In which case, the entire rule book must be a hoot to read with you.


And we did play! A lot at first. And then less. And then not at all. And then I talked 1 quitter into playing the new lizards book and dwellers his slan with my lvl2 damsel turn 1. that was a good game of blood and glory that didn't reach round 2.

-Person 1: I will tell you now that you have not eaten enough crap-sandwiches to really enjoy crap-sandwiches! Sure I didn't like crap-sandwiches at first but after several months of them being my only sustenance... I grew to enjoy them. -Person 2: I just scrape the crap off. They are served on some high quality bread!

Vipoid
29-05-2014, 15:18
Does the BotWD offer actual MR I'm not aware of??? I'll have to read it again I must have missed that part... because the regular 2++ ward save is not granted by MR. Unless you're specifically trying to reading it in a way that allows you to claim that... Instead of the -actual save- any type of save that MR gives can be taken and they do give ward saves so then you can take the ward save even though it is not granted by MR. In which case, the entire rule book must be a hoot to read with you.

I believe he was referring to the suggestion that Dwellers (and similar spells) should allow ward saves.

Snake1311
29-05-2014, 15:46
Are people actually running Life to do this though? You're better off spamming Spirit Leech and the other death snipes as they are much lower risk and also are great against single models like Chimeras/DPs which Dwellers sucks at.

If you want sniping there are better, lower risk and more cost effective options. Which is why Death is so ubiquitous now where those armies have the option.

Against a T3 Ld8 wizard with either 4++ or MR3, a Ld10 spirit leech will do a single wound average (3 casts to kill), caress will do the same. Either of those can be further managed to a lot less by combining a ward and magic res, if you are concerned about getting sniped; and gradual death by putting wounds allows for further time to react.

Dwellers does it in under 2 casts average, and there is nothing you can do to mitigate the effect, and the wizard dies straight away when it works.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath
29-05-2014, 16:06
Does the BotWD offer actual MR I'm not aware of??? I'll have to read it again I must have missed that part... because the regular 2++ ward save is not granted by MR. Unless you're specifically trying to reading it in a way that allows you to claim that... Instead of the -actual save- any type of save that MR gives can be taken and they do give ward saves so then you can take the ward save even though it is not granted by MR. In which case, the entire rule book must be a hoot to read with you.


And we did play! A lot at first. And then less. And then not at all. And then I talked 1 quitter into playing the new lizards book and dwellers his slan with my lvl2 damsel turn 1. that was a good game of blood and glory that didn't reach round 2.

-Person 1: I will tell you now that you have not eaten enough crap-sandwiches to really enjoy crap-sandwiches! Sure I didn't like crap-sandwiches at first but after several months of them being my only sustenance... I grew to enjoy them. -Person 2: I just scrape the crap off. They are served on some high quality bread!

BotWD protects against all damage from magic and spells, including miscasts and magic weapons. Furthermore a 4++ in combination with Mr(2) gives a 2++. Put that item into a character bus of sisters of the thorn or brolocks and you've got a 2++ against spells as well.

The only way to get around those right now is "save or die" spells like purple sun. Spells which are also your best way of taking down ogre, troll, or temple guard deathstars.

I'll also say that losing your Slann turn 1 isn't an auto-lose, and anybody who thinks that way is a poor player. That's a huge amount of points and force multiplier to lose early, but I've seen people win games regardless (and lost games as well).

Spamming dwellers is bad Warhammer. It'll win you a game here and there, but running a smart magic phase is a much more consistent path to victory. Just like running a big Death Star will win you some games but not all, while a more flexible MSU army is typically the better strategy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath
29-05-2014, 16:49
Against a T3 Ld8 wizard with either 4++ or MR3, a Ld10 spirit leech will do a single wound average (3 casts to kill), caress will do the same. Either of those can be further managed to a lot less by combining a ward and magic res, if you are concerned about getting sniped; and gradual death by putting wounds allows for further time to react.

Dwellers does it in under 2 casts average, and there is nothing you can do to mitigate the effect, and the wizard dies straight away when it works.

In theory maybe, but in practice you've rarely got two turns with range on your opponent's mage bunker before your units are in combat, at which point you generally need that magic support a LOT more than you need to snipe out their mage.

That's why you don't really see people running life magic all that often. Beyond dwellers it's got a lot of spells to protect your points, but not a lot of spells that are earning you any. It is very, very rare that I see anybody even running life these days. It's all high, death, heavens, and metal. Life is a crutch lore, and the more people play the game the more they realize that other lores offer a better toolkit than '6-dice dwellers' every game. What does dwellers do when you're up against a chariot-spam Warriors of Chaos list?

More importantly, I've been running tomb kings for 2 years and NEVER had anybody cast dwellers or final trans on my mage bunker. Not once. If it's being cast it's to thin down my big tomb guard block, because the 33% chance of killing a mage isn't worth 6 dice, while thinning down 33% of my tomb guard horde most certainly is.

ewar
29-05-2014, 16:53
Against a T3 Ld8 wizard with either 4++ or MR3, a Ld10 spirit leech will do a single wound average (3 casts to kill), caress will do the same. Either of those can be further managed to a lot less by combining a ward and magic res, if you are concerned about getting sniped; and gradual death by putting wounds allows for further time to react.

Dwellers does it in under 2 casts average, and there is nothing you can do to mitigate the effect, and the wizard dies straight away when it works.

I don't disagree Dwellers is a stronger spell - but in the lists I'm seeing Death sniping is considerably more popular than Dwellers sniping, mostly for the reasons outlined before. In my experience Dwellers is fantastic against Elves but pretty meh against everything else, except maybe Skaven who generally will have multiple S3 characters together.

@KalEf I misread your post, I thought you were saying to allow wards to work against it, no need to get your knickers in a twist.

Snake1311
29-05-2014, 17:04
In theory maybe, but in practice you've rarely got two turns with range on your opponent's mage bunker before your units are in combat, at which point you generally need that magic support a LOT more than you need to snipe out their mage.

Not necessarily. Gibbing their mage means they dont get any magic support either; so if you vanilla units > their vanilla units, why not cancel the whole thing out? Besides, its 2 turns average; however the result is actually binary, so in half the games you will just kill theri mage T1.


That's why you don't really see people running life magic all that often. Beyond dwellers it's got a lot of spells to protect your points, but not a lot of spells that are earning you any. It is very, very rare that I see anybody even running life these days. It's all high, death, heavens, and metal. Life is a crutch lore, and the more people play the game the more they realize that other lores offer a better toolkit than '6-dice dwellers' every game. What does dwellers do when you're up against a chariot-spam Warriors of Chaos list?

Its obviosuly not the only lore in use, but its not bad, even in such subpar situations. Against WoC MMU Lists like the chariot spam one, the plethora of buffs arguably does a better job to swing combat than hexes would. And don't forget that the lore attribute can be immensely good if the list is built to accomodate it.


More importantly, I've been running tomb kings for 2 years and NEVER had anybody cast dwellers or final trans on my mage bunker. Not once. If it's being cast it's to thin down my big tomb guard block, because the 33% chance of killing a mage isn't worth 6 dice, while thinning down 33% of my tomb guard horde most certainly is.

Firstly, last 1.5 years roughly coincides with the WoC book release, which did indeed push dwellers down the meta - but with three elf books out now, that is no longer the case. Secondly, its 50% chance to kill that hierophant, and then quite a bunch of support units might just go and pop as you start crumbling, i.e. your opponents are arguably making a bad call. Thirdly, I do not know who your opponents are and what armies they run - is this based on uncomped tournament experiences? Tournaments in the UK who allow uncomped dwellers for whatever reason tend to have a very strong lore of life presence (like SCGT this year, which is nearly 200 people).

Snake1311
29-05-2014, 17:10
I don't disagree Dwellers is a stronger spell - but in the lists I'm seeing Death sniping is considerably more popular than Dwellers sniping, mostly for the reasons outlined before. In my experience Dwellers is fantastic against Elves but pretty meh against everything else, except maybe Skaven who generally will have multiple S3 characters together.


Death can be more of a toolbox at times, which has its uses. Dwellers is a gamewinner against Elves and Skaven as you mentioned though (4 books so far), plus many of the popular Empire builds, most Dwarf builds, Orcs (they are S4-5, but all the characters tend to go in the Savage Big Uns unit), Lizardmen (Slaan is S3), Tomb Kings, most infantry Vampire builds (general might be S5 but the dudes supporting him are not - and its still a 1 in 6 chance to pretty much flat out win on top of the other damage), Beastmen, Ogres (S4-5 but again multiple characters in gutstar)....its only really WoC and DoC that don't really care much to be honest.

WhispersofBlood
29-05-2014, 17:27
Death can be more of a toolbox at times, which has its uses. Dwellers is a gamewinner against Elves and Skaven as you mentioned though (4 books so far), plus many of the popular Empire builds, most Dwarf builds, Orcs (they are S4-5, but all the characters tend to go in the Savage Big Uns unit), Lizardmen (Slaan is S3), Tomb Kings, most infantry Vampire builds (general might be S5 but the dudes supporting him are not - and its still a 1 in 6 chance to pretty much flat out win on top of the other damage), Beastmen, Ogres (S4-5 but again multiple characters in gutstar)....its only really WoC and DoC that don't really care much to be honest.

I tend to think of Warhammer like the free market, market pressures will determine what is good. Go take a look at a couple army list forums and count how many times you see lore of life. The lore is pardon my pun on life support.

Lord Dan
29-05-2014, 17:57
I tend to think of Warhammer like the free market, market pressures will determine what is good. Go take a look at a couple army list forums and count how many times you see lore of life. The lore is pardon my pun on life support.

Which is more a commentary on the general power of the Lores of Shadow and Death than it is a testament to the weakness of Life. Incidentally, all three have their own insta-kill bomb spells.

WhispersofBlood
29-05-2014, 18:37
Which is more a commentary on the general power of the Lores of Shadow and Death than it is a testament to the weakness of Life. Incidentally, all three have their own insta-kill bomb spells.

I see light more than I see shadow. Generally shadow is about turning Elf units into blenders, and pit as a utility spell. Of the armies that can take life/shadow and Death (The elf armies, Lizardmen, Empire) only Dark Elves take Death regularly. HE's are pretty well distributed between Loremaster, Shadow and High. Lizardmen are disproportionally Loremaster High, and Empire generally use Light then Heavens. As the Meta evolves Chaos are moving towards tzeentch/metal/shadow from Death as the DP leaves the competitive meta.

Regardless your of the opinion that these spells is so over powering it warps the game. The market disagrees with your anecdotal evidence.

Vipoid
29-05-2014, 18:50
I see light more than I see shadow.

The market disagrees with your anecdotal evidence.

Yes, obviously your anecdotes are better than his anecdotes...

:eyebrows:

WhispersofBlood
29-05-2014, 18:52
Yes, obviously your anecdotes are better than his anecdotes...

:eyebrows:

http://warhammer-empire.com/theforum/index.php?board=13.0 Go look for yourself.

Not including Special characters, and lists of 2k or more the first page has 5 light wizards, 3 metal wizards, 1 Shadow wizard and 3 life wizards. Including special characters there was two Gelts for 5 metal wizards. There are a few lists that didn't include lores.

Lord Dan
29-05-2014, 19:12
http://warhammer-empire.com/theforum/index.php?board=13.0 Go look for yourself.

Not including Special characters, and lists of 2k or more the first page has 5 light wizards, 3 metal wizards, 1 Shadow wizard and 3 life wizards. Including special characters there was two Gelts for 5 metal wizards. There are a few lists that didn't include lores.

Yes, the Empire has the tendency to spam Light councils. It's amazing what access to cheap casters and a Lore of Light humvee will do to an army.

Ironically, your anecdotal evidence actually proves my point. If you put aside lists with Lore of Light which are using Light Councils in some form, the Lore of Life is actually tied for first place.

With the Lore of Metal. Which has an almost identical spell.

WhispersofBlood
29-05-2014, 19:25
Yes, the Empire has the tendency to spam Light councils. It's amazing what access to cheap casters and a Lore of Light humvee will do to an army.

Ironically, your anecdotal evidence actually proves my point. If you put aside lists with Lore of Light which are using Light Councils in some form, the Lore of Life is actually tied for first place.

With the Lore of Metal. Which has an almost identical spell.

Did you actually look? There weren't any light councils... As I was counting actually wizards if there were councils the numbers would be much higher as a council needs 3 or more casters + war alter. Final Trans isn't identical at all, static 5+? 6+ for multi-wound models...

Try again?

Lord Dan
29-05-2014, 19:59
I would count anything with 2 Light Wizards and a War Altar as a Light Council, of which there are three (http://warhammer-empire.com/theforum/index.php?topic=48866.0, http://warhammer-empire.com/theforum/index.php?topic=48830.0, http://warhammer-empire.com/theforum/index.php?topic=48804.0on) on the first page. Even using your stricter definition of 3 mages + a war altar there is still one on the first page (http://warhammer-empire.com/theforum/index.php?topic=48772.0), and since, despite your passive aggressive confidence, you failed to noticed this, I decided to go through and actually do some counting. From lists on the first page of 2,000 points or more:

Level 3-4 Wizards
Lore of Light: 5
Lore of Metal: 5
Lore of Life: 5
Lore of Shadow: 1


Level 1-2 Wizards
Lore of Light: 8
Lore of Life: 3
Lore of Heavens: 1
Lore of Shadow: 1
Fire: 1

It's important to note two things, aside from the obvious discrepancy between your numbers and mine:

1. Of the five Lv. 4 Light Wizards, four belong to one of our definitions of a Light Council
2. Of the five Lv. 4 Metal Wizards, tree are just Balthasar Gelt.

So, removing Light Councils and special characters, what does that leave us as the most popular Lore for Lv. 4 Wizards using your anecdotal information?

Try again?

No, seriously. You should probably go recount.

WhispersofBlood
29-05-2014, 20:21
You're right I only really looked at Lvl 4 wizards since that was the discussion. However, lets use your definition of light council since it will be more humorous and closer to the point of the thread. Why discount Light council from the count? If these test or die spells are as powerful as you insist would they not also be "better" than Light council who's only collective benefit over lore splitting is 1 high strength 2d6 Magic missile? Again the market says they aren't, and if they are that power as you describe the market thinks they are competitive with the rest of several other choices available. Which would mean the lores as a deck whole are roughly equivalent including those spells.

Your argument is basically Apple products are so good everyone has one! When the market is clearly divided. That example isn't even accurate because none of the power spell lores take up as much share as apple does. You've also carefully avoided responding to the "OPness" of Final Trans.

I didn't think I was being passive aggressive... I thought it was straight up aggressive, should I curse next time?

ewar
29-05-2014, 21:44
I didn't think I was being passive aggressive... I thought it was straight up aggressive, should I curse next time?

Just so you're aware, this doesn't come across as impressively as you seem to think it does. Beating your chest on an internet forum whilst bickering over magic spells is not the most macho of pass times.

OT: I think the info pulled out by Dan shows that people are pretty evenly split across lores which have a solid impact on that army - which isn't too surprising. I'd reproduce the result for Tomb Kings but it would make for a duller read...

SteveW
29-05-2014, 22:04
As an aside, Bret players are pretty evenly split on two lores to take on their level 4s. Neither one is life.

So that begs the question, "if dwellers is so overpowered why do Bret generals shun it even with them already being so underpowered?".

Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

WhispersofBlood
29-05-2014, 22:19
Just so you're aware, this doesn't come across as impressively as you seem to think it does. Beating your chest on an internet forum whilst bickering over magic spells is not the most macho of pass times.

OT: I think the info pulled out by Dan shows that people are pretty evenly split across lores which have a solid impact on that army - which isn't too surprising. I'd reproduce the result for Tomb Kings but it would make for a duller read...

Except he seems to think this shows people are disproportionally gravitating towards lores with power spells. Except when taken as an example an army with access to all lores with test or be removed spells they choose to take any of them less than 25% of the time. And, in those cases we can't even be sure they would take the spell every time. Although with life what else are you are almost forced if you want to do damage at range.

theunwantedbeing
29-05-2014, 22:28
So that begs the question, "if dwellers is so overpowered why do Bret generals shun it even with them already being so underpowered?"

There are a lot of obvious reasons but it basically boils down to Bretonnians having no real need for Dwellers, Beasts Magic works far better for them.

Lord Dan
29-05-2014, 22:30
Except he seems to think this shows people are disproportionally gravitating towards lores with power spells. Except when taken as an example an army with access to all lores with test or be removed spells they choose to take any of them less than 25% of the time. And, in those cases we can't even be sure they would take the spell every time. Although with life what else are you are almost forced if you want to do damage at range.

Primarily it shows that the Lore of Life isn't on "Life Support", as you mentioned earlier. It also shows that, when not running a list designed around a gimmick or a special character, the Lore of Life is being overwhelmingly chosen within the confines of the data you selected.

As to whether or not that directly corresponds to Dwellers Below, I can't say.

WhispersofBlood
29-05-2014, 23:04
Primarily it shows that the Lore of Life isn't on "Life Support", as you mentioned earlier. It also shows that, when not running a list designed around a gimmick or a special character, the Lore of Life is being overwhelmingly chosen within the confines of the data you selected.

As to whether or not that directly corresponds to Dwellers Below, I can't say.

But you're discounting those things arbitrary to prove you point. Those things are all part of the same game, and if these spells were as game deciding as you propose they would be taken over both. You've also failed to answer the elephant in the room, where is death and shadow? The discussion is power spells well were are they?

http://www.ulthuan.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=67 Second army HE
Total casters, again 2000+: 41

Shadow 4 = 9.8%
Loremaster 7 = 17.1
Life 4 = 9.8%
Death 2 = 4.9%
Beasts 2 = 4.9%
High 12 = 29.3%
Metal 1 = 2.45%
Allarielle 4 = 4.9
Light 3 = 7.32%
Fire 1 = 2.45%
Teclis 1 = 2.45%

Let's say for arguments sake that the Everqueen counts as one in each of the lores she has access to that still only puts the 4 test or be removed lores at 29.37% of HE list have access to a test or die spell. That is only seven hundredths of a percent more often then people are taking just High Magic.

The numbers aren't supporting your argument of the game altering power these spells have. If they were the numbers would show them being taken at rates that blow the rest out of the water.

Lord Dan
29-05-2014, 23:28
People don't choose lores based on the bomb spell, they choose it based on overall synergy and strength. Bomb spells just happen to skew the mental math involved with making that decision. Death and Shadow simply don't synergize with Empire all that well, and the risk of rolling 1, 2, 3, 4 for your Ld. 8 Lord-level caster on the Lore of Death spell roster isn't worth the chance of rolling up Purple Sun for many players.

That said, I think if bomb spells were guaranteed it would change the game significantly. Take Balthasar Gelt, for example. The Lore of Metal is an incredibly lackluster lore for Empire barring Enchanted Blades, Final Transmutation, and, in a more situational sense, Glittering Robe (yay, 4+ armor Halberdiers... :shifty:). Do you think it's a coincidence that he's run so often and has guaranteed access to Final Transmutation? What if he had another +1 to cast (so +7), but didn't have guaranteed access to Final Transmutation? Do you think you'd see him as often? What if he were Loremaster for a less powerful lore, such as the Lore of Fire?

Look, you can disagree all you want, but "look, no one runs it" is not an appropriate response to the widely accepted belief that Dweller's Below is simply too powerful for casual play in its current incarnation.

Josfer
29-05-2014, 23:28
I think dwellers isn't the only offender in this regard. And it does some things WAY better than other offenders in the list. For example strenght drops barely below 3. So statistically speaking you get a maximum of 50% of the unit. And a minimum of 17%. Thats a third. Now look at PSOX. Max 83%, min 17% again. W T F ? And while dwellers can hit a whole unit instead of only a template...the template can easily hit 5 full rows, so 50 guys in a horde or 100% of the unit if <6 wide or deep. I like Final Transmutation with 1/3 flat (besides multiple wounds stuff, which is stupid in my opinion) and think this should be a baseline with a small part going to 1/2 and a small part going to 1/6, all these spells would be fine. But now there are LOTS of targets with S3/I3-... And being able to use LOS would be cool in these cases so characters are a bit more save but using them on single targets wouldn't decline in power. If you'd allow ward saves, then the power level would drop significantly and you should think about reducing the possibilities to dispel or being able to cast into CC.

KalEf
29-05-2014, 23:31
I believe he was referring to the suggestion that Dwellers (and similar spells) should allow ward saves.
I agree! however that was not what I had said at all. Fortunately, I do not have to prove intent to reference me and involve me in conversation as he was kind enough to write this.


@KalEf I misread your post, I thought you were saying to allow wards to work against it, no need to get your knickers in a twist.
Which I appreciate! as "I misread" is more adult than most on the internet can bring themselves to be... second part is a little more standard internet ;)




BotWD protects against all damage from magic and spells, including miscasts and magic weapons. Furthermore a 4++ in combination with Mr(2) gives a 2++. Put that item into a character bus of sisters of the thorn or brolocks and you've got a 2++ against spells as well.

The only way to get around those right now is "save or die" spells like purple sun. Spells which are also your best way of taking down ogre, troll, or temple guard deathstars.

I'll also say that losing your Slann turn 1 isn't an auto-lose, and anybody who thinks that way is a poor player. That's a huge amount of points and force multiplier to lose early, but I've seen people win games regardless (and lost games as well).

Spamming dwellers is bad Warhammer. It'll win you a game here and there, but running a smart magic phase is a much more consistent path to victory. Just like running a big Death Star will win you some games but not all, while a more flexible MSU army is typically the better strategy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A: please read! it is almost as easy as writing! The conversation was supposed to be about a hypothetical rules set where, exactly what you are saying, is incorrect. In this context, what you're saying is just random information. As if I was yelling at people "148 is the page Blood and Glory can be found." "The last page containing words in my rule book is 512!"

B: Also, I'm glad you are capable of writing down some basic strategies and pretending like everything happens in a vacuum. I read that a lot online! It's usually coupled with a -you suck- in the form of "noobs this" or "poor generals" that, and an -I'm great- in the form of "veteran players" this and "good generals" that. But maybe that is not the case, you have factored everything in, and I'm ready to learn!


And then I talked 1 quitter into playing the new lizards book and dwellers his slan with my lvl2 damsel turn 1. that was a good game of blood and glory that didn't reach round 2.



I'll also say that losing your Slann turn 1 isn't an auto-lose, and anybody who thinks that way is a poor player.

In this game of "blood and glory" (which I specifically referenced) my friend was dropped to his breaking point in the first round... How would you, as A GREAT player, come back from that and "win regardless", as you say. I would reallllly like to know... Actually the brilliance will probably be beyond me. So, if anyone else wants to help explain it, I'd appreciate that as well!

WhispersofBlood
29-05-2014, 23:54
People don't choose lores based on the bomb spell, they choose it based on overall synergy and strength. Bomb spells just happen to skew the mental math involved with making that decision. Death and Shadow simply don't synergize with Empire all that well, and the risk of rolling 1, 2, 3, 4 for your Ld. 8 Lord-level caster on the Lore of Death spell roster isn't worth the chance of rolling up Purple Sun for many players.

That said, I think if bomb spells were guaranteed it would change the game significantly. Take Balthasar Gelt, for example. The Lore of Metal is an incredibly lackluster lore for Empire barring Enchanted Blades, Final Transmutation, and, in a more situational sense, Glittering Robe (yay, 4+ armor Halberdiers... :shifty:). Do you think it's a coincidence that he's run so often and has guaranteed access to Final Transmutation? What if he had another +1 to cast (so +7), but didn't have guaranteed access to Final Transmutation? Do you think you'd see him as often? What if he were Loremaster for a less powerful lore, such as the Lore of Fire?

Look, you can disagree all you want, but "look, no one runs it" is not an appropriate response to the widely accepted belief that Dweller's Below is simply too powerful for casual play in its current incarnation.

You're actually proving my point. Your argument is that these spells are so potent that they warp the game and how it is played. By stating a reasonable assertion from the stats that people choose their lores based on factors other than a "bomb" spell you are proving yourself wrong. To be so potent they warp the game they would need to make the choice so painfully obvious that the choice is almost not in the players hands at all. Metal and Shadow work just well for empire both have ways of bypassing poor WS, and hitting power, nuking S makes armour more valuable, Mindrazor is great on Empire infantry hordes which boast hatred and hammer of sigmar, and withering works well with shooting and in combat if not removed.

I just find your argument funny. If it is as powerful as you believe show some proof, or explain why it isn't taken. It would show somewhere, somehow, have some effect. Just because something is generally believed doesn't make it true, there are enough examples in human history to illustrate this. Now, if when you say casual play and mean below average players that's fine I won't debate it with you because I don't have much experience there. But I can tell you its extremely rare in competitive and amongst serious players. As you progress in a tournament the more you win the less likely you are to face lore of life, in the last 3 years of events which is about 57 games of competitive hammer I've faced Lore of Life two times.

Lord Dan
30-05-2014, 01:09
You're actually proving my point.
I feel like this statement is misused a lot.



Your argument is that these spells are so potent that they warp the game and how it is played.
Yes.




By stating a reasonable assertion from the stats that people choose their lores based on factors other than a "bomb" spell you are proving yourself wrong. To be so potent they warp the game they would need to make the choice so painfully obvious that the choice is almost not in the players hands at all.
So, they can't be overpowered because they're not so game-breaking that they aren't, literally, a no-brainer? Are you hearing yourself?



Metal and Shadow work just well for empire both have ways of bypassing poor WS, and hitting power, nuking S makes armour more valuable, Mindrazor is great on Empire infantry hordes which boast hatred and hammer of sigmar, and withering works well with shooting and in combat if not removed.
If Shadow is such a great lore, why don't more Empire players take it? :p Shadow is a strong lore for buffing infantry/debuffing enemy infantry (hence, why every Elf player not running High magic typically runs it in a tournament environment), which isn't terribly appealing to an army like Empire which has it's toys do most of the heavy lifting. I don't have any idea as to what you're on about with Metal, except for the old Enchanted Blades on the Hellblaster trick which your opponent will only ever let through once.



I just find your argument funny.
This must be the part where you reframe my argument to make this statement sound less condescending, because you already stated my argument before:

Your argument is that these spells are so potent that they warp the game and how it is played.
And that didn't sound very funny?



If it is as powerful as you believe show some proof, or explain why it isn't taken. It would show somewhere, somehow, have some effect. Just because something is generally believed doesn't make it true, there are enough examples in human history to illustrate this. Now, if when you say casual play and mean below average players that's fine I won't debate it with you because I don't have much experience there. But I can tell you its extremely rare in competitive and amongst serious players. As you progress in a tournament the more you win the less likely you are to face lore of life, in the last 3 years of events which is about 57 games of competitive hammer I've faced Lore of Life two times.
So...your anecdotal evidence trumps mine, I need to provide proof which doesn't exist, something philosophical about humanity, I must be an inexperienced player if Dwellers is affecting me so much, when I'm a big strong Warhammer player who's ascended to the level of tactical wisdom achieved by those like you I'll start to understand what you're talking about.

Did I miss anything?

olderplayer
30-05-2014, 02:35
I don't know where you come from Whispersofblood, but where I play lore of life is quite common and is typically limited to allow a look out sir for characters (ETC, for example, allows two characters to take look out sirs) or some similar adjustment. We see lore of life on mages in the DE, WE, and HE armies now, as well as with Lizardmen, occasionally empire, Bretts most often on the lvl 4, etc; so it is quite common,

The issue, which you seem to miss, is not that dwellers is always broken in every game, but it makes for a really bad game against many armies that need and rely on S3 characters, especially armies with high points cost lvl 4 mages. The issue is not the ability to take out deathstars or hordes or point denial units; it is the ability to take out a lvl 4 mage in a modest mage unit with 25% probability on a single cast and virtually guarantee the win for the guy casting it if the mage dies. Also, you have better than a 50% chance of successfully casting the spell when six dicing it and the opponent with only 5 or 6 dispel dice will often have to let throne get off to save the dice to stop dwellers. I've had games where my opponent got lucky winds of magic rolls three turns in a row and cast dwellers three turns in a row just to take out my lvl 4.

It does little against certain Warriors of Chaos armies which are common in the meta game. There is shockingly little strategy to casting it and ensuring getting within 24" to cast it as well and to avoid it; one ends up having to hide and render partially ineffective one's mage and that often does not work.

Phazael
30-05-2014, 02:41
To be fair, Metal has a lot of play in an empire army. Enchanted Blades is useful for handling etherials and enhancing the attacks on certain units, ranged or mele. Glittering Scales is ludicrously good on greatswords. Most of the rest of the lore is sort of a meta based thing, where it is going to be more useful if your facing a lot of 1+ armor spam in your area. Light is probably better against the general field, but I have seen meta shifts where a lot of Empire guys opted for metal to counter other knight wall armies popping up. If your meta is packed with Daemons, its not really going to see much play. Shadow is largely redundant for empire, because cannons and buffwagons tend to do what the lore does in other armies. Right now, the most predominant setup I have seen in four GTs this year has been light council, because it trashes Daemons in addition to the other awesome utility the lore does. Besides no empire player ever likes to even move his wizard, let along leave their own deployment zone, which kind of puts the kibosh on dwellers spamming with empire.

And yeah Dan, if Dwellers is so overpowered and unstoppable, then the tournament scene would certainly be dominated with it. The only people who even brought Life to the Masters were both High Elf players who (/drumroll) stuffed guys into Lionstars and spammed it at people. Neither of those guys did particularly well at the masters, by the way. The reality is that all the empirical evidence points to Dwellers not winning games at the higher levels of play, which puts it in the same category as a lot of other one trick armies that rack up wins against inexperienced people. As someone who has been on the giving and receiving end of both spells, I have to say I have seen 6 dice cacobomb win a lot more games than I have ever seen dwellers win.

And in general, ETC play and results are only a valid metric for ETC Warhammer games. They do not have a lot of relevance to standard warhammer, because of all the rules rewrites and other constraints. No offence to the fans of ETC (of which I am not one, to be fair), but its like trying to compare kickball to baseball.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath
30-05-2014, 03:12
A: please read! it is almost as easy as writing! The conversation was supposed to be about a hypothetical rules set where, exactly what you are saying, is incorrect. In this context, what you're saying is just random information. As if I was yelling at people "148 is the page Blood and Glory can be found." "The last page containing words in my rule book is 512!"

B: Also, I'm glad you are capable of writing down some basic strategies and pretending like everything happens in a vacuum. I read that a lot online! It's usually coupled with a -you suck- in the form of "noobs this" or "poor generals" that, and an -I'm great- in the form of "veteran players" this and "good generals" that. But maybe that is not the case, you have factored everything in, and I'm ready to learn!

C. In this game of "blood and glory" (which I specifically referenced) my friend was dropped to his breaking point in the first round... How would you, as A GREAT player, come back from that and "win regardless", as you say. I would reallllly like to know... Actually the brilliance will probably be beyond me. So, if anyone else wants to help explain it, I'd appreciate that as well!

A) so in your hypothetical world there are no BotWDs, no 3++ rerolling 1s WoC BSBs, no MR stacking with wards...in short, a completely different landscape for character protection.

The problem inherent to your proposed rules overhaul is that some way of stacking obscene protections onto a unit will invariably slip through the cracks. GW places more emphasis on producing a glossy sale able product than a tight, thoroughly tested ruleset. Give a book to Matt Ward and suddenly we have three armies whose character busses have a potential 2++ vs spells. That may as well be immunity. Throw enough hurt in there and now it's immune to combat as well.

Unless GW starts play testing their rules better these stacking protections will always exist somewhere, and compel a certain number of players to build deathstared mega units. And the only way to defend against them at the moment is 6 spells or a deathstar of your own. And deathstars aren't fun or compelling Warhammer.

B) At the tournament level people don't run life very often. I'm not claiming to be some tactical genius (I'd call myself a middling player TBH), but I play in a very competitive meta and never see Life. I've played against it...once? In the last year. And even then I didn't get dwellers'ed. He was more concerned about flesh-to-stoning his big executioner block so that my I10 tomb guard didn't chew clean through them.

C) I'd build an army where losing a single model didn't auto-lose a major scenario, to start. Any lost so reliant on any one piece is quite seriously flawed. Think of what would happen if he miscast and jumped down a hole first turn? Happened to a friend of mine game 1 of a tournament. And you know what? He STILL pulled out a win, through a combination of good luck and smart playing elsewhere.

The other week an opponent purple sunned his own demon prince off the board turn 1 (misfire, rolled a 6). He still won too, because I was careless with my terrorgheist and didn't have enough other tools to deal with 5 skullcrushers and 6 chaos knights.


You're never going to get away from Rock-Paper-Scissors syndrome in a game like Warhammer. Dwellers is a rock to some armies' scissors, but not all. Not even most. It's only "overpowered" against certain armies running certain very specific builds. Yeah you'll have a bad game where you roll that '6' and lose your wizard. But you'll also have games where you roll a '1' on your Look Out Sir and lose your general to a cannonball, or your hierophant to a dimensional cascade, or your big deathstar fails a panic check and runs right off the board. That's just warhammer.

I'm with Phazael on this one. Dwellers just isn't all that bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WhispersofBlood
30-05-2014, 03:29
I feel like I'm debating climate change, I'm presenting all these numbers, examples, and yes anecdotal evidence. And your counter argument is nah this is how I feel. Its simple if you can't, touch it, feel it, see it, measure it, it simply doesn't exist. Now basically my argument boils down to one statement, a reasonable assertions, and a summation. In a game where the goal is to have to win within the rules provided. Assuming this is true, you would use all (or the best) rules available to you following your choice of army. When we look at 2 example armies we found there was not a disproportionate increase in the selection of lores with test or die spells, showing that these are not the best rules or abilities available.

Lord Dan your position has no levers to move or effects to measure, if it was correct there would be some effect on the game to show it. Can you even point to one effect or measurable stat of how they have caused damage or even good to the game that proves your point? Ignore how you personally feel about it, show us your right. You've written yourself into such a corner that you would basically would have to show somehow that they are taken a disproportionate amount of the time, or that they are disproportionately game deciding. I would add the caveat that you should use the best possible context so we are sure that all other factors are minimized. We've all dwellered newbs before that in itself isn't sufficient evidence to show a distortion, as almost any lack in knowledge can be used to beat a poor player.

I suggest you ask or look around, because I would be perfectly willing to accept that I am wrong. I've done it before on this very forum.

KalEf
30-05-2014, 04:19
A) so in your hypothetical world there are no BotWDs, no 3++ rerolling 1s WoC BSBs, no MR stacking with wards...in short, a completely different landscape for character protection.

The problem inherent to your proposed rules overhaul is that some way of stacking obscene protections onto a unit will invariably slip through the cracks. GW places more emphasis on producing a glossy sale able product than a tight, thoroughly tested ruleset. Give a book to Matt Ward and suddenly we have three armies whose character busses have a potential 2++ vs spells. That may as well be immunity. Throw enough hurt in there and now it's immune to combat as well.

Unless GW starts play testing their rules better these stacking protections will always exist somewhere, and compel a certain number of players to build deathstared mega units. And the only way to defend against them at the moment is 6 spells or a deathstar of your own. And deathstars aren't fun or compelling Warhammer.

B) At the tournament level people don't run life very often. I'm not claiming to be some tactical genius (I'd call myself a middling player TBH), but I play in a very competitive meta and never see Life. I've played against it...once? In the last year. And even then I didn't get dwellers'ed. He was more concerned about flesh-to-stoning his big executioner block so that my I10 tomb guard didn't chew clean through them.

C) I'd build an army where losing a single model didn't auto-lose a major scenario, to start. Any lost so reliant on any one piece is quite seriously flawed. Think of what would happen if he miscast and jumped down a hole first turn? Happened to a friend of mine game 1 of a tournament. And you know what? He STILL pulled out a win, through a combination of good luck and smart playing elsewhere.

The other week an opponent purple sunned his own demon prince off the board turn 1 (misfire, rolled a 6). He still won too, because I was careless with my terrorgheist and didn't have enough other tools to deal with 5 skullcrushers and 6 chaos knights.


You're never going to get away from Rock-Paper-Scissors syndrome in a game like Warhammer. Dwellers is a rock to some armies' scissors, but not all. Not even most. It's only "overpowered" against certain armies running certain very specific builds. Yeah you'll have a bad game where you roll that '6' and lose your wizard. But you'll also have games where you roll a '1' on your Look Out Sir and lose your general to a cannonball, or your hierophant to a dimensional cascade, or your big deathstar fails a panic check and runs right off the board. That's just warhammer.

I'm with Phazael on this one. Dwellers just isn't all that bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A: You still didn't read the original convo lol... anyhow, I agree that GW play tests poorly. And the super death spells are a testament to that. The argument that they need more crappy unhinged things strewn about because they should not be required to play test well, does not hold water with me.

B: My point was, the superdeath spells are too much and have made people quit. The first turn win, is an EXAMPLE of how ridiculous they are and an EXAMPLE of someone quitting. whether life is used infrequently, is of little consequence to my point. If you are telling me the Big Name spells like purple sun are never used, then maybe there is less to be afraid of!

C: I'm glad you are finally allowing yourself to see that the game was truly over the first turn. Saying he could come back after a loss of those points, that it wasn't an auto lose, and the name calling is off putting for me. As I clearly stated both the game was over and the scenario it was. I assumed you would then make it about either doing better in the future or he should have brought a different army... I was going to use that to segue into 8th being a little too paper rock scissors for me but we are here already.

So I agree. a lot of these saves& items& spells etc are ridiculous/ poorly play tested, and that 8th edition feels a lot like more like paper rock scissors and a lot less like chess. However, if big name spells aren't mopping the floor with full armies anymore, i will apologize for singling them out!

Lord Dan
30-05-2014, 04:41
I feel like I'm debating climate change, I'm presenting all these numbers, examples, and yes anecdotal evidence. And your counter argument is nah this is how I feel. Its simple if you can't, touch it, feel it, see it, measure it, it simply doesn't exist. Now basically my argument boils down to one statement, a reasonable assertions, and a summation. In a game where the goal is to have to win within the rules provided. Assuming this is true, you would use all (or the best) rules available to you following your choice of army. When we look at 2 example armies we found there was not a disproportionate increase in the selection of lores with test or die spells, showing that these are not the best rules or abilities available.
I think you're putting a lot more stock into your ridiculously non-scientific method of measuring Lore popularity than you probably should. Pointing to the cover page of the army list forum for two armies as proof of your point and then demanding I try to disprove it is ludicrous. It's like pointing to two Wendy's locations, noting that only 20% of the customers ordered Frosties, and then putting it on me to prove that more than 20% of customers order Frosties.

My opinion remains unchanged because no matter how much dubiously-relevant data you put forth, I've played in too many games where my opponent Dweller's/Purple Sun/Pit of Shades/Final Transmutationed/Dreaded 13th'd his way into a victory over a bad dice roll to be convinced that those spells are underpowered. The reason Empire players don't spam Life is because the Light Council is more powerful. That doesn't make Dweller's Balanced. The reason High Elf players don't take Shadow is because they can get a 3++ on their Pheonix Guard from High Magic. That doesn't make Dweller's balanced.

Heck, half of the people now arguing against the power of Dweller's below were arguing, just a few pages ago, about the fact that it needs to be that powerful in order to counter deathstars. Deathstars. You know, the nigh-unkillable power singularities of death? If these spells are tailor-built to obliterate deathstars, how can people simultaneously argue that they aren't stupidly-powerful?



Lord Dan your position has no levers to move or effects to measure, if it was correct there would be some effect on the game to show it.
There. Are. And no, pointing to two lists of army lists and saying: "Look, see, no evidence!" does not make your case. My argument is, at this point, that the argument isn't provable one way or another. At best we could look at a handful of tournament list breakdowns to get an idea of which armies are performing well, but even then we'd be taking anecdotal evidence and trying to pretend it's fact.



Can you even point to one effect or measurable stat of how they have caused damage or even good to the game that proves your point?
Of course I can. Anyone who's played any amount of Warhammer in a seriously competetive meta has had their level 4 knocked off the board from Dweller's turn 2, or had some stupid flying magic chuck an IF'd Purple Sun down the flank of their entire army, or had a big horde of Saurus or Dwarf Hammerers vanish into a Pit of Shades. Frankly, I'm surprised you don't have any examples to give.



Ignore how you personally feel about it, show us your right.
You want me to empirically prove to you that Dweller's Below is too powerful?

...

Yes, I'll get right on that, but only because you've asked so nicely. I should have my argument together right around the time I'm able to prove the existence of God.




You've written yourself into such a corner that you would basically would have to show somehow that they are taken a disproportionate amount of the time, or that they are disproportionately game deciding. I would add the caveat that you should use the best possible context so we are sure that all other factors are minimized. We've all dwellered newbs before that in itself isn't sufficient evidence to show a distortion, as almost any lack in knowledge can be used to beat a poor player.
Dweller's'd noobs? I've said this elsewhere in this thread, but I don't think people are 6-dicing Dwellers against you in enough games, dude. You come back to me after someone shoehorns that spell through on an IF on whatever unit you prize the most, and then come back to me and tell me about how only noobs "let" Dwellers below go off.



I suggest you ask or look around, because I would be perfectly willing to accept that I am wrong. I've done it before on this very forum.
194025

SteveW
30-05-2014, 04:47
I play in a no comp cut throat environment and play at least 4 games a week almost every week dwellers has existed and it has won exactly 1 game for me against skaven and lost me 1 game while playing as goblins.

I really fail to see how people consider it soooo powerful.

Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

JPThunda
30-05-2014, 05:45
Any spell that doesn't allow saves of any kind needs to be toned down severely if not removed from the game all together. All of them. Dwellers, Pit, Purple Sun, Dreaded 13th, Final Transmutation. All of them.

Watching my opponent march forward, throw 6 dice, and promptly being told to replace my unit of 20 Grave Guard/20 Hammerers + General with a unit of clanrats is not fun and never will be. The power level of the magic phase right now is absolutely absurd and needs to be toned down by an order of magnitude at least.

People have said in this thread "Oh, we need these spells for death stars and mega hordes". How about instead of sucking the fun out of the game with the fun sponges that are these spells we try and convince GW to disincentive-ize the kind of play that makes these spells 'necessary'.

WhispersofBlood
30-05-2014, 05:45
So your argument now is my evidence isn't evidency enough?

I've played against and with power spells maybe I play with and against a different caliber of player than you do. Once we stop presenting high reward situations (pretty early on in 8th) the spells quickly dropped out of popularity. The entire premise of 8th edition is risk/reward. The risk is known, if you lower the reward the opponent is more mindful of the risk, and vise versa increase the risk the reward brings less value. I've already presented a pretty manageable situation where the opponent might choose a different course of action. Change the risk/reward dynamic and you change the decision making of the opponent. Truthfully this is were we leave rules design and move into tactics.

My actual argument, if I was to break it down to its most basic form. Is that there are several spells that when applied correctly are just as game ending, they are just less overt. Now you seem to equate game ending as over powered or unbalanced, where I see these spells as the killer stroke to reward my good play or punish your poor play in the proceeding phases.

Assuming your army is well equipped with dummy drops, and multiple positions for characters you should be able to with relative ease avoid a turn 1 dwellers through multiple means. The most basic deploying 25+ move away from the caster, the more advanced using vanguard units and scouts to prevent the enemy moving within 24, or cavalry units within threat range of the position the opponent would need to take up to hit you.

Now lets say I've spend my turns clearing your chaff, blocking or engaging your units that could threaten my wizard, and moved into position. Why shouldn't I be able to deliver the blow? I've outplayed you and Dwellers is just the most obvious killer stroke as opposed to engaging in combat. Casting the spell carries some risk, failure to cast the spell might result in all your careful plans being basically fruitless and your unit exposed, IR could cost you your unit and wizard. What is often ignored is that unless you kill a character you don't score any victory points so you still generally need to engage in combat. The opposite approach is engaging and buffing with magic where you potentially score all the units VPs but you are risking combat, higher reward higher risk. The market has apparently decided this is the better approach and I'm inclined to agree as it gives your opponent less options, especially if he is set up to fight the same game.

In the example some of the other posters have described, well first of all a solid player isn't going to let you 1st turn power spell him. In the event that this happens in a w/d/l system or friendly playing for the draw, and in a 20-0 system minimize the score. By playing defensively, or picking off vulnerable units. You know reacting to changing circumstances.

Again it might be anecdotal but we have 41 examples of wizards people have thought about, and they have overwhelming gone the hex/buff direction showing at least sub-consciously they know combat is where the power is. It is also kind of interesting that some of the most powerful combat units are the most vulnerable to magic, Beast of Nurgle and Ogre bricks for example.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath
30-05-2014, 06:30
A: You still didn't read the original convo lol... anyhow, I agree that GW play tests poorly. And the super death spells are a testament to that. The argument that they need more crappy unhinged things strewn about because they should not be required to play test well, does not hold water with me.

B: My point was, the superdeath spells are too much and have made people quit. The first turn win, is an EXAMPLE of how ridiculous they are and an EXAMPLE of someone quitting. whether life is used infrequently, is of little consequence to my point. If you are telling me the Big Name spells like purple sun are never used, then maybe there is less to be afraid of!

C: I'm glad you are finally allowing yourself to see that the game was truly over the first turn. Saying he could come back after a loss of those points, that it wasn't an auto lose, and the name calling is off putting for me. As I clearly stated both the game was over and the scenario it was. I assumed you would then make it about either doing better in the future or he should have brought a different army... I was going to use that to segue into 8th being a little too paper rock scissors for me but we are here already.

So I agree. a lot of these saves& items& spells etc are ridiculous/ poorly play tested, and that 8th edition feels a lot like more like paper rock scissors and a lot less like chess. However, if big name spells aren't mopping the floor with full armies anymore, i will apologize for singling them out!

A) You need things to kill really big units because it's possible to build really big units. Unless GW goes back to the old way of just capping the size of units, that is, but I don't think anybody really wants to lose the flexibility. Put all your eggs in one basket and you risk getting dwellers, because you open yourself up to be a big target. I wouldn't throw 6 dice at dwellers unless there was a 1200 point S3 deathstar sitting there asking for it.

B) People whine about quitting for all sorts of reasons. Waaah random charges. Waaah premeasuring. Waaah super 6 spells. The people who play 8th now by-and-large think it's the best edition out so far. Yeah the 6 spells are a little too much, yeah steadfast needs a few more ways to break it, and yeah the universal LD10 IP+BSB bubble is pretty annoying, but overall this edition has a lot to offer.

Getting dwellers'ed the first time sucks, I know. Trust me. I've been playing exclusively undead armies exclusively for all of 8th, I have felt the pain of purple sun erasing half my army. But I've also seen someone purple sun their own demon prince off the board turn 1. I've lost my hierophant to a miscast on 2 dice turn one. I've used a screaming skull catapult to panic half my opponent's army off the board turn one. Warhammer is a dice game, and sometimes the dice do mean things to you.

But that's the game. You have to learn to adapt, not just complain. Dwellers exists, so you shouldn't put all your squishy wizards in one unit. Purple Sun exists, so when your opponent runs death you should spread your units out more. Pit of Shades exists, so you should bring a scroll and not expect that your 900-point ogre deathstar with the Rune Maw is invincible to magic (because it's damned near invincible to most anything else).

C) Blood & Glory is the only scenario it's possible to win turn 1. The rest of them it's not over until the fat lady sings. It's the same reason that tournaments award bonus points, rather than straight-out victory, for breaking your opponent in Blood & Glory: it's an issue with the scenario, not the spell.

But again, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Your friend lost his Slann turn 1 and auto-lost because his list had a massive defect. But guess what, there are other ways for that to happen. I auto-lost against a Warriors of Chaos player when I realized that I didn't bring enough answers to 1+ armour. I auto-lost to skaven when I realized I didn't have any way to break steadfast on a 72-man bell-pushing clanrat horde. But that's a problem in list construction, not in play. Your friend didn't build a list that could win without his Slann, so he loses when he loses his Slann. That's his problem, not dwellers' problem. Sorry but it's what happens when you bring nothing but skirmishing skinks and dinosaurs. Or what happens when chariot-spam Warriors comes up against Watchtower or Blood & Glory as well: banishment on the demon prince and it's GG.

However, build a balanced list that's not a 1-trick pony and these sorts of auto-losses don't happen. You'll come up against bad matchups, sure, but they're in the "hard fought" rather than "I couldn't do anything" category. But more importantly you are aware of that weakness (by having lost to it) and have thought of how to deal with it, and prepared yourself.


Heck, half of the people now arguing against the power of Dweller's below were arguing, just a few pages ago, about the fact that it needs to be that powerful in order to counter deathstars. Deathstars. You know, the nigh-unkillable power singularities of death? If these spells are tailor-built to obliterate deathstars, how can people simultaneously argue that they aren't stupidly-powerful?

Dweller's'd noobs? I've said this elsewhere in this thread, but I don't think people are 6-dicing Dwellers against you in enough games, dude. You come back to me after someone shoehorns that spell through on an IF on whatever unit you prize the most, and then come back to me and tell me about how only noobs "let" Dwellers below go off.

Nobody's arguing that Dwellers isn't a powerful spell for dealing damage to single units. The argument is that it is not overpowered GENERALLY. Dwellers and Final Trans can both kill 50-33% of a unit with average dice rolling, but unless you're running a massive death star that's not going to break the game. In fact, it's not even likely to destroy more points than an average casting of banishment, chain lightning, or mindrazor could do. Or, for that matter, an average cannonball or direct hit with a stonethrower.

More importantly, 6-dice dwellers is a Tier 0 strategy. It's the kind of thing only rookies and ******** try to pull off, like the DP+triple chimera+all chariot core list. Everybody gets burned by it once or twice, then builds counters into their list to tackle it. Now you don't see that warriors list at the top of the tournament ladders because everybody knows how to defeat it. You bring banishment for the prince, or cannons for the crushers and chimeras. Flaming to get rid of regen (works against troll hordes too). Chaff to redirect the crushers all day.

Against dwellers you bring a scroll, you spread out your targets, and you don't put all your eggs in one basket.

Snake1311
30-05-2014, 09:00
More importantly, 6-dice dwellers is a Tier 0 strategy. It's the kind of thing only rookies and ******** try to pull off, like the DP+triple chimera+all chariot core list. Everybody gets burned by it once or twice, then builds counters into their list to tackle it.

Ooo, them's big words. I take it you have finished at a podium in all tournaments you've attended in your area? :D

There is nothing Tier 0 about having blunt force in your arsenal when it is the best tool for the job, Occam's razor my friend. As an example, against lizards, you can chase around the 400 point General+BSB+Level 4 Slaan around through the sknik cloud all game long, for a very tactical game - but if they know what they are doing, you aren't gonna catch him. Or you could just dweller him turn after turn, until he dies, and use the rest of your army to pick up points elsewhere.

theunwantedbeing
30-05-2014, 12:14
Nobody's arguing that Dwellers isn't a powerful spell for dealing damage to single units. The argument is that it is not overpowered GENERALLY. Dwellers and Final Trans can both kill 50-33% of a unit with average dice rolling, but unless you're running a massive death star that's not going to break the game. In fact, it's not even likely to destroy more points than an average casting of banishment, chain lightning, or mindrazor could do. Or, for that matter, an average cannonball or direct hit with a stonethrower.

The issue people have with Dwellers is the character sniping aspect, not the damage it does to the unit (although it's still an unwelcome effect).

Specifically people have a problem with having their mage sniped on turn 1 or 2.

thesoundofmusica
30-05-2014, 12:54
The issue people have with Dwellers is the character sniping aspect, not the damage it does to the unit (although it's still an unwelcome effect).

Specifically people have a problem with having their mage sniped on turn 1 or 2.

Your mage dwellered on turn 1 or 2? With that range? That's really bad planning.

Sure its less fun when a single roll of the dice can change the outcome of a game but there are so many of these rolls in the game sometimes even the roll of who goes first.

PlasticSwap.Com
30-05-2014, 18:18
Dwellers is a very strong spell however I do not think its as "game changing" as many people feel it is. Playing a life slann in the previous version of the lizardmen book and having dwellers every game (and using it multiple times a game) I can only think of a few times that it actually was game changing. The problem is that life isn't that great of a lore after dwellers (so yes the argument about what magic being taken is extremely valid).

I believe it causes more mental agony then say your horde of troops running off the table after a bad round of battle but the effect is the same.

Also I agree with the above, your mage should at least get to turn 3 before he has to do the strength check (out of range on turn 1, dispel scroll on turn 2, turn three dwellers).

Alltaken
30-05-2014, 19:09
I believe a lot of us LM would still play life if we had loremaster

From my servoskull

WhispersofBlood
30-05-2014, 19:46
I believe a lot of us LM would still play life if we had loremaster

From my servoskull

Maybe, but by the time the book was getting up for redo, we were seeing a lot of death and light. And, they were generally more successful.

Alltaken
30-05-2014, 19:57
Maybe, but by the time the book was getting up for redo, we were seeing a lot of death and light. And, they were generally more successful.

Death and light are offensive lores, life isnt. So you know after playing life so long many of us changed lores. I tried light a little after I read it really

From my servoskull

Leogun_91
30-05-2014, 23:48
Your mage dwellered on turn 1 or 2? With that range? That's really bad planning.Or maybe your opponent has a flying mount for his wizard increasing the effective range by a lot or has enough chaff to force you to deploy first. For an enemy that plays such a strategy it is quite easy to get the spell of onto a desired target turn 1. Characters are deployed after the rest of the units so with some basic planning your foe should be able to place his wizard well aimed for ideal usage turn one. An exception is of course Dawn Attack where such placing planning is impossible.

SteveW
30-05-2014, 23:51
Then that caster is dead next turn weather or not the spell goes off.

Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

Phazael
31-05-2014, 00:16
Not to mention, how many armies have a defensible flying wizard with access to lore of life? Dark Elves have the best option with the cloak of twilight and Pegasus. Wood Elves and High elves can do the 4++ on a bird thing. Bretts and Empire can slap the 4++ on a peg. Not certain how defensible any of those options are against an enemy with access to light shooting, cannons, chaff, or magic missiles (read just about everyone). Its worth doing with PSun because generally its the Nurgle Net Prince of Brokeness and he causes way more carnage doing it. Frankly, outside of my self, I have never seen anyone running a solo flying wizard missile with anything other than lore of death for turn one purple nurple action. And even when I do it (WE girl on Unicorn or Brett girl on Peg), I am generally doing it as a gag and never taking life (High/Shadow and Heavens respectively) while doing it. Really, in the last two years I have seen about 2-3 flying wizards run at GTs and not a one ran life.

KalEf
31-05-2014, 01:30
A) You need things to kill really big units because it's possible to build really big units. Unless GW goes back to the old way of just capping the size of units, that is, but I don't think anybody really wants to lose the flexibility. Put all your eggs in one basket and you risk getting dwellers, because you open yourself up to be a big target. I wouldn't throw 6 dice at dwellers unless there was a 1200 point S3 deathstar sitting there asking for it.

B) People whine about quitting for all sorts of reasons. Waaah random charges. Waaah premeasuring. Waaah super 6 spells. The people who play 8th now by-and-large think it's the best edition out so far. Yeah the 6 spells are a little too much, yeah steadfast needs a few more ways to break it, and yeah the universal LD10 IP+BSB bubble is pretty annoying, but overall this edition has a lot to offer.

Getting dwellers'ed the first time sucks, I know. Trust me. I've been playing exclusively undead armies exclusively for all of 8th, I have felt the pain of purple sun erasing half my army. But I've also seen someone purple sun their own demon prince off the board turn 1. I've lost my hierophant to a miscast on 2 dice turn one. I've used a screaming skull catapult to panic half my opponent's army off the board turn one. Warhammer is a dice game, and sometimes the dice do mean things to you.

But that's the game. You have to learn to adapt, not just complain. Dwellers exists, so you shouldn't put all your squishy wizards in one unit. Purple Sun exists, so when your opponent runs death you should spread your units out more. Pit of Shades exists, so you should bring a scroll and not expect that your 900-point ogre deathstar with the Rune Maw is invincible to magic (because it's damned near invincible to most anything else).

C) Blood & Glory is the only scenario it's possible to win turn 1. The rest of them it's not over until the fat lady sings. It's the same reason that tournaments award bonus points, rather than straight-out victory, for breaking your opponent in Blood & Glory: it's an issue with the scenario, not the spell.

But again, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Your friend lost his Slann turn 1 and auto-lost because his list had a massive defect. But guess what, there are other ways for that to happen. I auto-lost against a Warriors of Chaos player when I realized that I didn't bring enough answers to 1+ armour. I auto-lost to skaven when I realized I didn't have any way to break steadfast on a 72-man bell-pushing clanrat horde. But that's a problem in list construction, not in play. Your friend didn't build a list that could win without his Slann, so he loses when he loses his Slann. That's his problem, not dwellers' problem. Sorry but it's what happens when you bring nothing but skirmishing skinks and dinosaurs. Or what happens when chariot-spam Warriors comes up against Watchtower or Blood & Glory as well: banishment on the demon prince and it's GG.

However, build a balanced list that's not a 1-trick pony and these sorts of auto-losses don't happen. You'll come up against bad matchups, sure, but they're in the "hard fought" rather than "I couldn't do anything" category. But more importantly you are aware of that weakness (by having lost to it) and have thought of how to deal with it, and prepared yourself.

New least favorite things about these huge unbalanced spells!
they make all the other ridiculousness/ poorly balanced things they've come out with ok to some people. And then the justifications can feed off each other. Well I need A for B. Well B is ok because A is ok

For me the criteria for Over powered or Unbalanced feels more like "this is toooo good too often" and less like "there are times this is not useful" Everyone's feel for the term can be different. If you added "bomb" which beat paper and scissors... but lost to rock. I would feel that "Bomb" was unbalanced. yes it still can lose, the game would just be different, and yes you could still win with anything... Probably a good meta for "rock" players lol

If there was a signature spell that "killed all non skirmishing models", that cast on a 5+. People would just have to play differently as well. And the game would be even further removed from a game I actually want to play.

However, I hope you realize though, if you say "just play differently" it makes nothing unbalanced... the game just plays differently. A magic Item that instantly Kills all elves within 12"? just don't use elves!... I really really wouldn't play that game!

Said from the beginning that the people who are still playing, are the people more forgiving of GW and/or the people who actually like to play with that dynamic. However GW is a Business, and 8th edition has been a faster increase in sales and new players than any previous edition... than maybe I'm in the minority.

Also doing a lot of this again


B: Also, I'm glad you are capable of writing down some basic strategies and pretending like everything happens in a vacuum. I read that a lot online! It's usually coupled with a -you suck- in the form of "noobs this" or "poor generals" that, and an -I'm great- in the form of "veteran players" this and "good generals" that. But maybe that is not the case, you have factored everything in, and I'm ready to learn!!

You can keep doing it, but I don't think it's is winning friends. The largest Turny I won was only 35 people (end of sixth) and the smallest was a meager 10 (1 year into 8)... man 8th killed our scene. anyhow, I can probably get you a pic with my name on the trophy if it will make you stop doing that. My friend who quit is a computer programmer, was a chess champ in high school, and was my favorite person to play against.

Leogun_91
01-06-2014, 00:01
Then that caster is dead next turn weather or not the spell goes off.

Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja'sIf he is placed in a unit reasonably close? Not necessarily, depends fully on the kind of unit and the protection the character has, as well as what you have left to counter it with, your juiciest target just took a dweller you must remember.
Flying is an extreme case rarely taken but it would have been if the range was a mayor problem (and a riding life wizard alternative is less extreme and sometimes seen), characters are placed late enough in the setup phase to be able to choose what targets to go against fairly well, I did mention just placing him in a reasonably close unit using chaff to see where he can be placed and that it is easily done, three or four chaff units should be enough to get the desired information before placing your wizard unless your foe maxes out chaff specifically to stop such tactics and confuse the enemies deployment (I rarely see that tactic used but do it a lot with arrerboyz when I play my greenskins).

SteveW
01-06-2014, 04:38
You wrote flying mount. What flying mount can go in a unit when a spell caster is on it? Stop moving the goalposts.

KalEf
01-06-2014, 05:26
You wrote flying mount. What flying mount can go in a unit when a spell caster is on it? Stop moving the goalposts.

Oh my good god, he stated flying was 1 option and then gave another option that could be a character on a mount, on foot, ANYTHING!!! just as long as you have some extra units to place. Because he was referencing different ways to help (an already pretty decent) spell range tmk... but I actually read his post.

You are being unfair by attributing his statement to what it is -obviously not- intended to be referenced. If he then said "oh really you think a mage is automatically dead by deploying it late in a unit?" you guys would now be even. He also managed to give out strategies without pretending his opponent is an idiot, pretending he has infinite resources, playing with a custom tailored list, pretending things work 100% of the time, or being ridiculously condescending... which is probably a hell of a lot better than I can muster most days lol

SteveW
01-06-2014, 05:50
Oh my good god, he stated flying was 1 option and then gave another option that could be a character on a mount, on foot, ANYTHING!!! just as long as you have some extra units to place. Because he was referencing different ways to help (an already pretty decent) spell range tmk... but I actually read his post.

You are being unfair by attributing his statement to what it is -obviously not- intended to be referenced. If he then said "oh really you think a mage is automatically dead by deploying it late in a unit?" you guys would now be even. He also managed to give out strategies without pretending his opponent is an idiot, pretending he has infinite resources, playing with a custom tailored list, pretending things work 100% of the time, or being ridiculously condescending... which is probably a hell of a lot better than I can muster most days lol
In the post I replied to he said flying, not on foot, not mounted, and not magic'd to the gills for extra movement. He then moved the goal posts by including the others, don't act like my response to him was after he said on foot or in a unit or whatever. It was specifically for the wizard on a flying mount and nothing more.

thesoundofmusica
01-06-2014, 05:53
Ok so a Life wizard with resonable range who is either sacrificed or well protected while outdeploying your oblivious opponent then 6dicing IF dwellers AND having the opponent fail his characteristics test.... Yeah not really a huge deal I feel, certainly not a reliable tactic to removing mages turn 1-2.

KalEf
01-06-2014, 06:04
In the post I replied to he said flying, not on foot, not mounted, and not magic'd to the gills for extra movement. He then moved the goal posts by including the others, don't act like my response to him was after he said on foot or in a unit or whatever. It was specifically for the wizard on a flying mount and nothing more.
well lets take a look shall we?

Or maybe your opponent has a flying mount for his wizard increasing the effective range by a lot or has enough chaff to force you to deploy first. For an enemy that plays such a strategy it is quite easy to get the spell of onto a desired target turn 1. Characters are deployed after the rest of the units so with some basic planning your foe should be able to place his wizard well aimed for ideal usage turn one. An exception is of course Dawn Attack where such placing planning is impossible.

By "or" here I take him to mean... well the English word OR. He then continues to explain how this strategy works in 2 posts. Apparently he assumed readers would understand and read better than they do.

You on the other hand made no explicit distinction of any kind and made a statement with a lot of assumptions.


Then that caster is dead next turn weather or not the spell goes off.

Sent from my lumina 925 using ninja's

Did I miss an older post from him in this thread?

SteveW
01-06-2014, 06:07
well lets take a look shall we?


By "or" here I take him to mean... well the English word OR. He then continues to explain how this strategy works in 2 posts. Apparently he assumed readers would understand and read better than they do.

You on the other hand made no explicit distinction of any kind and made a statement with a lot of assumptions.



Did I miss an older post from him in this thread?

So when you see "or has chaff" you equate that to could be mounted in a unit and magic'd up? Hahahaha! ok buddy, you win.

Well then he wasn't factoring in all my guys having sharks with freekin lasers...lol

KalEf
01-06-2014, 06:23
So when you see "or has chaff" you equate that to could be mounted in a unit and magic'd up? Hahahaha! ok buddy, you win.

Well then he wasn't factoring in all my guys having sharks with freekin lasers...lol

Well I read it "or I can choose to deploy my non-flying bomb in whatever unit is closest to the target he wants to bomb, as long as I got a lot more crap to put on the table than my opponent does!" but I'm just spitting hairs now, so I should be an adult, and stop.

I'll also say that mutated, ill-tempered, sea bass are a much better deal, and can be rush ordered ;)

Leogun_91
01-06-2014, 10:26
Well I read it "or I can choose to deploy my non-flying bomb in whatever unit is closest to the target he wants to bomb, as long as I got a lot more crap to put on the table than my opponent does!" but I'm just spitting hairs now, so I should be an adult, and stop.You did indeed understand my original meaning. To SteveW I apologize if I was being unclear and reading my post again I see that I could have been clearer by writing a longer post better describing the strategy, I (perhaps falsely) assumed most people where already familiar with the chaff force deployment tactic and thought a shorter mentioning would suffice.
I apologize for any confusion this may have caused.

SteveW
02-06-2014, 08:34
You did indeed understand my original meaning. To SteveW I apologize if I was being unclear and reading my post again I see that I could have been clearer by writing a longer post better describing the strategy, I (perhaps falsely) assumed most people where already familiar with the chaff force deployment tactic and thought a shorter mentioning would suffice.
I apologize for any confusion this may have caused.

I am aware of chaff, I try not to assume anything and just read what people write though. So when I read that you had no defense to my shark lasers, I win..lol

It's all good, thanks for the clarification.

Athlan na Dyr
02-06-2014, 09:32
I've played against and with power spells maybe I play with and against a different caliber of player than you do...

I think this and the assumption that 'if its balanced at your level, its balanced for everyone' is the problem here.

To put simply, I think that the game should be balanced at all levels rather than only for a few levels (or tiers, if you prefer) of players. I would argue that Dwellers isn't balanced across the board because it offers a reasonable chance of gaining a huge advantage (magic dominance) through comparatively little effort, especially when compared to other methods of wizard hunting.


To elaborate my point further, most of the stupid crap armies can pull has a counterbuild present elsewhere in the game. For tourney players, this generally means that this stuff isn't taken by or against them as it comes with the risk of having a 0-20 result against a bad match-up. PirateRobotNinjaofDeath gives us a prime example:

It's the kind of thing only rookies and ******** try to pull off, like the DP+triple chimera+all chariot core list. Everybody gets burned by it once or twice, then builds counters into their list to tackle it. Now you don't see that warriors list at the top of the tournament ladders because everybody knows how to defeat it. You bring banishment for the prince, or cannons for the crushers and chimeras. Flaming to get rid of regen (works against troll hordes too). Chaff to redirect the crushers all day.
Now, this is all well and good except that some of these counters aren't universally accessible. Also, in a single game setting as opposed to consecutive ones, the disincentive against the aforementioned WoC army rapidly diminishes. In effect, the more casual the game in question, the more unbalanced that build will become.
(the point of the above being that, just because its not unbalanced at top level doesn't necessitate that trickling down through the rest of the game)

Now I will freely admit that I don't have vast hordes of data and statistical evidence to back up my views on Dwellers. I only have a feeling, and that feeling is I would need to spend vastly more effort and models into preventing my wizard being sniped than my opponent would need to put in to do so. Hence, I think its overpowered (but not game breaking). Perhaps in the environments you play in, this isn't the case. Regardless, I have an issue with it and would like to see that changed.

That said, I do agree that the spell's use against non-character models is necessary in the game so long as death star potential remains. Counters are needed, but I would argue the better way to fix that is removing the original problem of deathstars by disadvantaging them in the core rules. The simple reason being that it doesn't then devolve the game into 'I have Unit X. Armies A, B and C have access to spell/unit/rule M that counters Unit X, and therefore it is balanced. Sucks that you play Army D.'

I also agree that the buff spells are generally better and worth more than the nukes. The major problem is the issue of character sniping, rather than unit damage, for dwellers.


tldr: IMO its too efficient. Toning it down and the things its meant to counter would be a good thing.

Potato

WhispersofBlood
02-06-2014, 12:58
I'm sorry isn't that what people have been asking for? A game where player skill determines the outcome? Your post essentially says you want a game where player skill doesn't matter and everyone should have an equal chance of winning because trying is all that maters... General rule of thumb is to be successful you spend more points, or greater preperation in a given situation than your opponent has. Which is why equal points comparisons annoy me, what makes your points better than his points other than that they are yours?

Snake1311
02-06-2014, 13:18
I'm sorry isn't that what people have been asking for? A game where player skill determines the outcome? Your post essentially says you want a game where player skill doesn't matter and everyone should have an equal chance of winning because trying is all that maters... General rule of thumb is to be successful you spend more points, or greater preperation in a given situation than your opponent has. Which is why equal points comparisons annoy me, what makes your points better than his points other than that they are yours?

Thats not even slightly what his post says. You are fixating on "my points" and "your points" whereas his example could easily have been reversed (him dwellering his opponent).

He is making the point that the very basic tactic of dishing out a max-dice dwellers at the opponent's wizard brings back disproportionate returns to the points invested, and that it is only worse at lower skill levels where players aren't prepared for that eventuality - whereas the ease of the manouver means its accessible more or less from the get go.

I'm going to add my 2c here - while there are plenty of such isntances in the game, which new players eventually learn to deal wtih, the issue with dwellers is that its largelyunmanagable (well, nothign in *unmanagable*, but dwellers requires a disproportionate amount of work). 24" and not requiring line of sight means your T3 wizard can't really hide - so your deployment is wrecked if you want to be staying out of range, nevermind that you don't dare put multiple characters in a single unit.

It is not an instant "I Win" button, because you still have to get winds for it, cast it, draw the scroll out,etc (which are all very likely to succeed) but it presents a nuclear option which the other player has to play around to too large of an extent, lest they risk giving the game away.

Its still a problem at high levels by the way. List builds there either avoid anything thats dwellers-vulnerable (i.e. pick armies where single characters fly about), or it tends to be comped.#


For the record, I don't agree with his overarching point - game design philosophy is definitely based on balancing for the top end; learning curve considerations come second (and those are fairly different by armybook/build anyway). Otherwise the "most complex" army build will have the most potential (since its hardest to use) and at a certain point everyone will play that is it offers the highest ceiling.

Athlan na Dyr
03-06-2014, 00:55
Thats not even slightly what his post says. You are fixating on "my points" and "your points" whereas his example could easily have been reversed (him dwellering his opponent).

He is making the point that the very basic tactic of dishing out a max-dice dwellers at the opponent's wizard brings back disproportionate returns to the points invested, and that it is only worse at lower skill levels where players aren't prepared for that eventuality - whereas the ease of the manouver means its accessible more or less from the get go.

Essentially, yes. Gotta agree with all you just said.


For the record, I don't agree with his overarching point - game design philosophy is definitely based on balancing for the top end; learning curve considerations come second (and those are fairly different by armybook/build anyway). Otherwise the "most complex" army build will have the most potential (since its hardest to use) and at a certain point everyone will play that is it offers the highest ceiling.

That was less about learning curve considerations and more about arguing the idea that tournament lists give an indication of what's balanced and what isn't, as Whispers was using tournament lists and their lack of life magic as a justification of it being not unbalanced. I'm arguing that this isn't the case, because of the use of non-universal counter-builds in tournaments.

For example, consider the DP + Chimera + chariot army. The counter-build was presented as
a) Light Council
b) cannons
c) flaming attacks
d) chaff

which is great except my army doesn't have access to
a) Light Council
b) cannons

which means I'm kinda screwed, and would still find that army unbalanced despite it not seeing play in tournaments. That was my other point, the rest is me rambling on :)

WhispersofBlood
03-06-2014, 03:14
I use tournament play because the rules, GW designers and GW sales include the assumption that casual play includes tailoring to your regular opponent. The assumption is if Timmy is spamming dwellers on Jimmy, Jimmy pops down to his local GW asks a local and gets a unit that will help him cope or vise versa.

Tournament play doesn't have this option its a closed system and therefor the results are a better measure of the true value of each part of the game. Life magic or more specifically Dwellers below isn't a model so it's not affected by the normal bias such as appearance, or availability. Bretonnians have 3 or fewer lores including life, so its not like it is a scarce commodity. So the argument becomes, in an environment where you could potential face anything (though there are greater odds of facing certain armies) is dwellers good enough to take. The answer apparently has been no, except in the case where you have either a need for the lore or something like the Everqueen or Teclis, where you can build a spell deck.

Again results show the lore, which includes the "OP" Dwellers isn't good enough.

Athlan na Dyr
03-06-2014, 04:37
Tournament play doesn't have this option its a closed system and therefor the results are a better measure of the true value of each part of the game. Life magic or more specifically Dwellers below isn't a model so it's not affected by the normal bias such as appearance, or availability. Bretonnians have 3 or fewer lores including life, so its not like it is a scarce commodity. So the argument becomes, in an environment where you could potential face anything (though there are greater odds of facing certain armies) is dwellers good enough to take. The answer apparently has been no, except in the case where you have either a need for the lore or something like the Everqueen or Teclis, where you can build a spell deck.
The tournament environment isn't an environment where you can 'face anything'. Its an environment where consistency is what is valued. The risk of getting 0-20 when your build shows up against a strong counter, or when your 6th spell isn't rolled or has no good targets is what keeps certain builds out of that environment. It doesn't mean the builds not present are balanced, it simply means that counters exist somewhere in the game. Its a bad way to look at game balance if you say that monster X is underpowered because of cannons if some armies lack cannons.
Similarly, its a bad way to look at balance if you say Spell D is underpowered because the rest of the lore is weak, match up A is bad, character A is too fast or strong for the spell to snipe and so on if some armies lack the ability to counter-build the spell or have to be so character dependant, the later being the case for Undead.

In essence, I would argue that its the rest of the Lore which keeps Life out of tournaments, as well as Dwellers being inherently variable due to the 'test or die on characteristic X' mechanic. I would still argue that its too powerful when it is up against S3 character based armies, especially Undead ones.


Again results show the lore, which includes the "OP" Dwellers, isn't good enough.
Exactly, they show the Lore of Life isn't good enough. That's the fault of the rest of the lore, not Dwellers. The trick to balancing that is to buff the weak parts and nerf the strong parts, not act as though the weak parts justify the OP ones.


I get the niggling feeling that we are looking at balance slightly differently. Where as I am imagining a rework from the ground up, you seem to be examining it from its current context and in a tournament environment, in which case arguing about the rest of the Lore justifying Dwellers makes a lot more sense to you than it does to me.

In terms of the changes I'd like to see to the spell, just allow it a LoS! roll to remove the abusive aspect and perhaps give it a more consistent damage mechanic. Buff the Lore into a strong, defensive buff based lore and I feel it(as in Life magic) would see more play.

WhispersofBlood
03-06-2014, 05:33
I think the actual difference is I'm looking at the game as a system or complex expression with multiple moving parts or equations, each part is only as powerful or influential as its effect on the game. You're describing multiple moving parts that happen to make a game, where each part is inspected on its own. I think the first is drastically superior because it allows pointing/balancing to influence theme, or style. The second does not, it also doesn't point or balance for when individual parts come into contact with each other. For instance upgrading to a halberd isn't always worth the same amount of points, sometimes it needs to be more expensive to make other options comparable, or when the unit can be combined with certain other units in the army.

Life is a great example of this, we're sitting here talking about one spell in a lore we can all admit isn't that impressive. In a game where you can pretty reliable shut down one spell a phase, I just can't see how it can be so overpowered as to effect the over all system negatively.

The main reason that lore of life is so mediocre is that its too reactive, after a certain point players realize its easy to mitigate defensive actions. Its hard to use Lore of life offensively because earth blood is casters unit, leaving it easy to mitigate leaving only one other buff. I used to run a little gaming clinic where I should players how to deal with situations they found vexing. One was life daemons. I showed they to make balanced list that gave them things to do in every phase, and taught them patience. Once the enemy had a bad magic phase you could jump all over them, and if they didn't you just did damage to the unprotected units and collected points steadily. This combined leaves dwellers as the only spell that can "reliably" be used offensively, the problem being it leaves you weak defensively in return, the ultimate double edge sword.

PirateRobotNinjaofDeath
03-06-2014, 05:41
I think this and the assumption that 'if its balanced at your level, its balanced for everyone' is the problem here.

...

Now, this is all well and good except that some of these counters aren't universally accessible. Also, in a single game setting as opposed to consecutive ones, the disincentive against the aforementioned WoC army rapidly diminishes. In effect, the more casual the game in question, the more unbalanced that build will become.
(the point of the above being that, just because its not unbalanced at top level doesn't necessitate that trickling down through the rest of the game)

...

That said, I do agree that the spell's use against non-character models is necessary in the game so long as death star potential remains. Counters are needed, but I would argue the better way to fix that is removing the original problem of deathstars by disadvantaging them in the core rules. The simple reason being that it doesn't then devolve the game into 'I have Unit X. Armies A, B and C have access to spell/unit/rule M that counters Unit X, and therefore it is balanced. Sucks that you play Army D.'

...


Your argument is very thought-provoking, but I must still respectfully disagree for two reasons:

1) it is actually quite important for games like Warhammer to NOT be perfectly balanced, as a lack of balance creates an evolving metagame as players seek to counter the prevailing "overpowered" strategies dominating the current play field; and

2) "easy to master" Tier 0 power strategies are also important, to give early dominance to players who master the basics of the game slightly faster than their peers, and force everyone in the group to elevate their game.


Let's actually start with point 2. For new players learning to master the game, "Tier-0 power strategies" are actually very important. High-level warhammer is a complicated dance. It requires an intimate knowledge of your own army, the armies of every opponent you might face, and an intricate mastery of the rules of the game and how to manipulate that. These are all things that are far beyond the understanding of new players.

Lucky for them they have the Warriors of Chaos netlist. It's got a low-model count (making it relatively cheap, and easy to paint). It's fairly one-dimensional (making it easier for a new player to master). And, most importantly, it's quite powerful...though one dimensional. For a new person it's perfect, allowing them to compete with more advanced players despite their deficit in skills.


Compared to everything else, each model in that army is probably a little too efficient for their points. But again, their downside is that they're one-dimensional and thus easy to counter. Every army has SOMETHING that can deal with it, and in a meta dominated by warriors these options will become more dominant. This creates the "metagame," an evolving system of strategy revolving around - not just what strategies are "numerically efficient" - but what strategies are the perfect counter to the sorts of armies that are dominating the current playing field.

People who play warhammer at a "higher" level aren't concerned by Dwellers because it's a "tier 0" stratgem. It's one-dimensional, predictable, and easy to counter. It's also not particularly dependable. I never see it in my meta because everybody I play has realized that it's not adaptable enough for an "all-comers" list.



Finally, you also made a point about tailoring. But tailoring isn't really something the game should (or even can) be balanced for. At that point you're approaching a game of rock-paper-scissors. It is never possible to make a list that doesn't have at least SOME weaknesses, and tailoring allows you to exploit that. I would argue that it is possible to build a hard-counter to ANY list, at which point your only constraint is the models that you actually own.

Edit: Extra Credits (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e31OSVZF77w) has a video that's perfectly on point for what I'm trying to say.