PDA

View Full Version : HE: Intrigue at Court



mattjgilbert
01-11-2006, 08:32
Does this affect ALL characters in the HE army, Lords and Heroes? It only ever appears under the Lords section on both pages 6 and 24 suggesting it only affects them.

Festus
01-11-2006, 08:34
Hi

IIRC it affects all HE Characters, including Mages, BSB, everything...

Festus

EvC
01-11-2006, 17:05
Yes, of course. Otherwise in a 2000 point game you wouldn't have to roll for the general, which is the entire point of the rule.

TheWarSmith
01-11-2006, 17:11
The only character it doesn't affect is Eltharion. He'll always be general.

I LOVE it when mages become the general. So soft and squishy. easier vp

mattjgilbert
01-11-2006, 19:20
Yes, of course. Otherwise in a 2000 point game you wouldn't have to roll for the general, which is the entire point of the rule.Which is what I thought. The book is badly laid out then.

misfire67
02-11-2006, 04:57
This rule may be the most ill conceived rule ever concocted. Nothing like having your army led by a lvl 1 scroll caddy.

I never liked the pure of heart rule either. An extra 100 pts is a lot to give up just to have a character and the unit he is with be immune to panic.

misfire67

Atrahasis
02-11-2006, 10:37
This rule may be the most ill conceived rule ever concocted. Nothing like having your army led by a lvl 1 scroll caddy.Don't take a level 1 scroll caddy then.


I never liked the pure of heart rule either. An extra 100 pts is a lot to give up just to have a character and the unit he is with be immune to panic.The 100 Vps is only lost if he dies. Don't let him die.

Gorbad Ironclaw
02-11-2006, 10:57
Not taking a caddy doesn't change the fact that it's one of the very worst rules in warhammer. Doesn't even make sense from a background point of view, although that was supposedly why it's there...

Atrahasis
02-11-2006, 11:04
Not taking a caddy doesn't change the fact that it's one of the very worst rules in warhammer. Doesn't even make sense from a background point of view, although that was supposedly why it's there...

I can't see the problem with it (and neither can our resident HE player, who has placed in the top 3 at GT Heats with HE).

If you don't like having a random general, then don't take as many characters. Its that simple.

Sleazy
02-11-2006, 12:06
I think its very characterful and a clever flaw in the HE structure, I use HE and find it adds to the story.

enyoss
02-11-2006, 13:42
If you don't like having a random general, then don't take as many characters. Its that simple.

True, this is a simple fix to the problem. I think it runs along the lines of other simple fixes though, such as: 'as an ethnic minority, if you don't like being stopped and searched, don't drive a nice car'. Fixes the problem, but doesn't really address the core issue, does it?

I agree with your point about scroll caddies and Pure of Heart though.

Just a quick question. Was it ever cleared up as to whether you could take just a Battlestandard and have him automatically become your general... I can't remember the outcome of that thread :)?

Cheers,

enyoss

Atrahasis
02-11-2006, 14:04
True, this is a simple fix to the problem. I think it runs along the lines of other simple fixes though, such as: 'as an ethnic minority, if you don't like being stopped and searched, don't drive a nice car'. Fixes the problem, but doesn't really address the core issue, does it?
I'm going to avoid your emotive comparison of a rule in a game to insitutional racism and just ask what you think the core issue is.

For all you (or I) know, the rule was INTENDED to encourage less characters. Combined with the ability of unit champions to take magic items (thus serving a support role usually filled by characters) this makes perfect sense.

Incidentally, the army with which my clubmate came third at the GT was all infantry, with a single mage (no scrolls) as general. All the things that people usually complain about in the HE army.

As far as a BSB goes - yes, you can take a single BSB as your sole character in a HE army. There is no reason why not.

enyoss
02-11-2006, 15:48
I'm going to avoid your emotive comparison of a rule in a game to insitutional racism and just ask what you think the core issue is.


:) I thought I'd get that response. You get the point though right?

I don't think the High Elf list is specifically designed to use less characters. Their cavalry is ok, but a unit of Silverhelms can't really be expected to perform as a tough 'charge and break' unit without a character to add a little extra punch.

Similarly, their infantry is quite expensive and offensive... great if you get the charge but, with the exception of Spearmen, quite woeful if you take one. It seems to me that characters are necessary to offset this. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that High Elves need characters more than anyone else, or complaining about their units (I'll leave that to Asur.org ;)), just saying that I can't see much to support them being specifically designed to have less characters.

Your point about Champions taking Magic Items is fair. However, especially with the infantry, they are on a T3 5+ Armour Save Elf (which, if a White Lion, strikes last)... not difficult to allocate one attack to the guy and tonk him for good, something that doesn't happen with harder characters.

Well, all a bit off topic there :angel: Sorry to the original poster...

Cheers,

enyoss

enyoss
02-11-2006, 15:55
Sorry just realised I didn't actually address the 'core issue', doh!

In summary, the core issue, in my eyes, is that the list isn't designed to be used with less characters and not having prior knowledge of the General. In fact, with the White Lions the exact opposite is true as they strike last with light armour (so need someone in the unit who can strike first and hard) and have a special rule which depends on who the General is.

I really can't see a stronger counter to the design argument than those guys.

Cheers,

enyoss

GranFarfar
02-11-2006, 16:01
For all you (or I) know, the rule was INTENDED to encourage less characters. Combined with the ability of unit champions to take magic items (thus serving a support role usually filled by characters) this makes perfect sense.

Incidentally, the army with which my clubmate came third at the GT was all infantry, with a single mage (no scrolls) as general. All the things that people usually complain about in the HE army.



And tell, why is it only High Elves who have a rule which encourage less characters(if I am missing some other rule, please point it out)? And it is a big flaw on an alerady flawed list.

And for you friend kicking ass with HE, good for him. I am sure he is a great player if he manages that. But that dosn´t prove that I@C isn´t a big draw back. If I would say: "I play HE all the time, and always loose because they are a bad army", someone will just answear - "Learn to play, use their strenght etc".
Don´t get why saying "I always win with this army" would be a better argument. Ok, maby I drifted of a bit, but this is often the case(not just with HE arguments) and it really bugs me.

EvC
02-11-2006, 16:18
IaC is there to represent the big egos that a lot of Elves have. And a gameplay mechanism. Though it'd be nice if there was a benefit to it as well!

Von Wibble
02-11-2006, 19:08
I was under the impression it was there to balance cheaper items.

Imo, there are other armies that should have rules for political infighting before high elves get them.

Skaven characters - they spend most of their time trying to kill each other. They should have a loyalty rating or chance to die before the battle starts (or during).

Dark Elf characters - see skaven...

So why give it to high elves? No background reason, purely a concieved balance to gameplay.

I think removing it next edition would be a good idea as it suddenly makes white lions useable (though from playtesting this as a house rule I can say that they need something else as well...)

Yaffar
02-11-2006, 19:21
why the high elves ?

in all the other armies the most powerfull iss the leader... in the very political structured high elve society not power, but political knowlege is the point.. so the stupid high elves even follow a wussi magician !

its like the USA ;)

(okok... or any other country)

inq.serge
02-11-2006, 19:25
IIRC IaC Was made by GW just because it's fun.

Orcs and Gobbos get animosity, so why shouldn't the elves get IaC?

The background says that elves do that for "excitement", because they like politics and such.

Would make sence to me if my mind wasn't lost.

enyoss
02-11-2006, 19:31
so the stupid high elves even follow a wussi magician !

its like the USA ;)

Bush is a magician?! What a man... might as well close the polls now, I know who I'm voting for!

Cheers,

enyoss

Xavier
02-11-2006, 19:41
As far as a BSB goes - yes, you can take a single BSB as your sole character in a HE army. There is no reason why not.

The BSB can only be the general if he is RANDOMLY selected to be it. So with one character, you roll the dice, on anything but a 1 your army is illegal.

enyoss
02-11-2006, 19:44
The BSB can only be the general if he is RANDOMLY selected to be it. So with one character, you roll the dice, on anything but a 1 your army is illegal.

That's the argument I'd seen put forward before. Is there a possibility of someone giving a direct quote from Intrigue at Court to help clear this one up. Would just look myself but all my stuff is on a different continent :(.

Cheers,

enyoss

inq.serge
02-11-2006, 20:20
Intrigue at Court

P.24
"The General of the High Elf army is determined randomly. Line up the characters and roll a dice. The number is the character nominated for General. If you roll over the number of characters in the army then the general is selected as normal instead."

and

P.6
"....If you have six or more characters, chose five of them to line up, and then roll as above."

Legal disclaimer: By reading this post, you agree that I'm not guilty of breaking any rule or law, and therefore can not be charged for anything that has to do with this.

enyoss
02-11-2006, 20:25
So I guess as normal selection prohibits the BSB from being the general, an army with just a Battlestandard would be illegal 5/6 games. That clears it up then. Thanks for the responses.

Cheers,

enyoss

misfire67
03-11-2006, 00:56
Don't take a level 1 scroll caddy then.

The 100 Vps is only lost if he dies. Don't let him die.

The point being made is no one only has a Lord character in their army...and certainly not a HE general. To have an army potentially led by a ld 8 character with 2 wounds is debilitating. To suggest taking only 1 or 2 characters is an ignorant response.

As far as your other comment...more ignorance. It just isn't constructive to take that type of "tone" with someone for just stating an opinion.

Overall, as a HE general for over 8 yrs...and I have enjoyed playing this army above all others...the rules just seems unneccessary.

misfire67

Eldacar
03-11-2006, 01:06
For all you (or I) know, the rule was INTENDED to encourage less characters.
Just to clarify, the I@C rule was added into the list by Jake as "something fun", and when the rest of the Dev Team opposed the idea, Jervis backed Jake up on it until they managed to push the rule through.

Tutore
03-11-2006, 04:11
Yes it is an annoying rule for us HE player, but it brings also to strange useful situations. Ever tried a BSB as a general?

Pacman
03-11-2006, 08:03
Intrigue at court is a bit of a pain, especially since some units and items (eg: White Lions, Lion Cloak) depend greatly on the general.

I think random fun stuff is great in big armies like greenskins, but in a small specialised army like HE it can really trash your gameplan sometimes. Although maybe HE generals would just benefit from being a bit more orcy and not letting it bother them when their army does stupid things ;)

tenpole
04-05-2014, 19:34
I have only recently got the HE 6th edition army book as I only have 6th edition rules. How did you get on with Intrigue at Court rule overall. I guess as my search for this rule only brought up old posts that the rule was dropped in the 7th and 8th editions. I did not think a BSB could be general but it was in the 6th edition rulebook p25.

MasterSplinter
05-05-2014, 07:36
jep, the rule was dropped for good reason gameplay-wise. Nothing worse than to have your leadership 8 level 1 wizzard with no save to be the general. And i think that your bsb could become the general by this rule too.

IMO you would do yourself a favor trying the rules for 8th edition, especially when playing high elves which get out far better under this ruleset then in 6th edition.

T10
05-05-2014, 08:03
I have only recently got the HE 6th edition army book as I only have 6th edition rules. How did you get on with Intrigue at Court rule overall. I guess as my search for this rule only brought up old posts that the rule was dropped in the 7th and 8th editions. I did not think a BSB could be general but it was in the 6th edition rulebook p25.

If I recall correctly, the BSB could indeed end up taking the role of the army general, but only if he was randomly selected. If you rolled high enough to choose freely then you could not opt to pick the BSB as the general.

The rule itself was interesting, but it was kind of at odds with the rest of the theme of the army. If anything it was in the wrong Elf army list: It would fit much better for a Dark Elf army.

-T10

theunwantedbeing
05-05-2014, 08:43
Nothing worse than to have your leadership 8 level 1 wizzard with no save to be the general.

Worse was having to play that person at any point in time after that roll happened.

tenpole
05-05-2014, 09:04
I actually play goblins, my eleven year old daughter wants to start a high elf army.
I was wondering if this ruleset had been designed with the I@C still in mind with the unit buffs if the general is within certain units. To drop the rule would mean to drop the entire army list. For the points we would be using at first it would make no difference anyway.

To use the 8th edition rules would mean buying a new ruleset, army books to get the balance. I have heard so many players complaining the 8th rules is designed to sell more figures and not gameplay. If the 6th edition was no good to play then we would use Kings of War by mantic games.

Edit:Although I have been thinking about the I.of Blood boxset as it has a nice range of figures.

MasterSplinter
05-05-2014, 09:40
To use the 8th edition rules would mean buying a new ruleset, army books to get the balance. I have heard so many players complaining the 8th rules is designed to sell more figures and not gameplay. If the 6th edition was no good to play then we would use Kings of War by mantic games.

Edit:Although I have been thinking about the I.of Blood boxset as it has a nice range of figures.

You are partially right on that one, although i must admit if you neglect the "money-factor" (which is hard to do) i think its far more exciting to play with big blocks of 30+ infantry models.

6th edition stands for its own, it has got a completly different approach, and some might find it to be more tactical, even when cavalry dominated the game. Nowadays its magic and steadfast "war of attrition".

I just had a glimpse at the kings of war rules. If you prefer it to be fast and simple it could be the right game for you (and your daughter).

I just recommend the IoB Starterbox, its fairly cheap and you get the full ruleset with it. If you´ll like the rules for 8th edition you can still say to play with a unit/point cap. A friend of mine who´s online here might give you more tips on this. Basically you make the compromise to have no higher bodycount as 30 models per unit and 300 points at the maximum per unit. The athmosphere of these games comes closer to what i remeber of 6th edition. There are further rulesets which limit the force of magic and big steadfast blocks like the german system "combat". But it may get to complex then, as writing armylists becomes more difficult and to have in mind these additional rules.

CountUlrich
05-05-2014, 12:13
8th edition os by far the best ruleset yet.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

tenpole
05-05-2014, 15:46
Kings of War is good because of its simplicity and fluid fast gaming, but by the same token I like Warhammer for its complexity with all the lovely niche rules coming into play.

Arnizipal
05-05-2014, 18:38
I actually play goblins, my eleven year old daughter wants to start a high elf army.
I was wondering if this ruleset had been designed with the I@C still in mind with the unit buffs if the general is within certain units. To drop the rule would mean to drop the entire army list. For the points we would be using at first it would make no difference anyway.
You had I@C but you also had the Pure of Heart rule that helped mitigate it somewhat (even though it was a double-edged sword).
All-in-all I think that generally speaking basic High Elf leadership was high enough to overcome most obstacles.

tenpole
09-05-2014, 19:27
Thanks all for your feedback on this. I think if we did stick with 6th edition I would keep the rule I@C as it is a novel item and High elves do have high leadership anyway. What I found more shocking in this book was the cost of a unit of spearmen - 11 points per model. Even with the fight in lines of three I thought this figure was harsh. Then I see silver helms as 'Core' and cheap for a cavalry. I bet many of the half elf armies during 6th edition were horse fests.

It would be a while before we could go down the 8th edition as the rulebooks are £30 each. I would want my Orc and Goblin book, eldest daughter high elf and wife would the demand Dark elf book. So thats £90 without getting my youngest's book Vampire counts (she is only four).