PDA

View Full Version : Dwarf Lord on shieldbearers...on foot?



Zonq
03-11-2006, 15:30
Hi everyone,

My friend who plays Dwarfs told me that a Dwarf Lord on shieldbearers is not considered mounted for the purpose of two-handed weapons (i.e. he claims that his lord has +2 S).

I'm very skeptical about this and I think that the Dwarf Lord should be considered "mounted", because he is not "on foot".

Could you please help me and give your opinion? (and page references are more than welcome)

Thanks,

Zonq

EvC
03-11-2006, 16:00
He's right, though you should be. This has been discussed to death in former threads...

DeathlessDraich
03-11-2006, 16:01
This is a contentious area.The rule book defines mounted - steeds, chariots etc but not shield bearers. There are some mounts which have not been mentioned e.g. Tzeentchian Disc but the army rule book does state indirectly that discs are mounts, if I remember.
Furthermore the only suggestion that the lord is above ground is the first sentence - "atop a shield".

Therefore it is not mounted until an FAQ clarifies this.

Festus
03-11-2006, 16:04
Hi

Basically, he is an abomination in the rules, but in all, I'd say he is an Infantry model with US3.

Festus

Zonq
03-11-2006, 16:08
Thank you for your quick answers.

So if I understand clearly: He's right, but it's just because a RAW interpretation...

Thanks anyway

Zonq

intellectawe
03-11-2006, 17:18
He is simply a model on foot. Nothing magical about it or odd.

Just like Bull Centaurs in a CD army list. They aren't mounted either :)

xmbk
03-11-2006, 17:30
I don't think you could call it RAW. Does he gain movement to counterract the loss of +2S? He's a unique model, and the silliness comes more from the idea of 2 dwarfs carrying their lord around on a serving platter than anything else. If you can believe that, everything else falls into place. :rolleyes:

The immunity to KB is a little harder to swallow. But for 15 pts the lord could have immunity to KB and poison, so it really isn't that big a deal, IMO.

TheWarSmith
03-11-2006, 17:58
yeah, but for 20 points he gains +2 US, +2W, +2A(lower WS and S, but still), immunity to KB. the 15 points for KB/poison immunity is nice, but that goes towards your runic limit, whereas the shield bearers don't.


Personally, it's such a stupid doof to the rules. As Festus said, truly an abomination. 7th ed was meant to streamline things for the most part and make things consistent. Then you have the shield bearers which throw a massive exception into the works.

Explain to me how 2 guys carrying a big fat dwarf on a platter are making WS5, S4 attacks? Try carrying your dad on a platform with your brother and tell me if you can swing an axe well enough to wound something other than a paper bag.

Also explain to me how the dwarf lord can be reduced to 1 wound, yet NO detriment is dealt to his fighting ability(shouldn't the shield bearers at least be dead?)

Baindread
03-11-2006, 22:13
+2W

He does? I can't seem to remember that rule? :confused:

Zeke1973
03-11-2006, 22:43
He gets +2 to his armour save, not +2 Wounds!

Mordu22
03-11-2006, 23:38
:evilgrin: shield bearers, shield, rune of stone, gromil armour:evilgrin:
nothing like a -1 armour save in CC

Lord Of The Night
04-11-2006, 02:39
Just wondering how does he get immunity to KB i thought you had to take the rune to get that.
also the dwarf lord can't have better than 1+

alextroy
04-11-2006, 02:42
Killing Blow affects models of US 1 or 2. Dwarf Lord on Shieldbearers is US 3.

Mordu22
04-11-2006, 03:43
Cannot have better than +1? wheres that at? all i read was that a roll of one always fails armor save but for modification purposes it can be lower

Festus
04-11-2006, 05:35
Hi

Correct, it can be lower.

Festus

WLBjork
04-11-2006, 10:51
The only time Dwarf Armour Save cannot be better than 1+ is the Master Rune of Gromril which cannot be improved in any way.

Haquim
04-11-2006, 13:43
Cannot have better than +1? wheres that at? all i read was that a roll of one always fails armor save but for modification purposes it can be lower


Read the description of the Shield Bearers, it clearly says a Dwarf Lord on shield cannot have a AS better than 1+. Other races can have armor saves lower than 1+ (Dark elven lord with Cold One, Sea Dragon cloak, heavy armour and enchanted schield for example) but for the dwarves 1+ is the lowest AS possible.

Btw I do not think the shield bearers are such a big problem: of course they give additional AS, make the Lord immune to Killing Blow and add two (weak) attacks, but all that doesn't change the Lord M, wich means if the enemy doesn't want to fight him he will not probably see combat.
The anvil of doom is one thousand times more dangerous than the Lord on shield, IMHO.

Mordu22
05-11-2006, 20:28
Would a dwarf lord with shield bearers and a rune of stone, and a shield get his +1 to armor in close combat as it is a modifier? also regarding shields i have seen posts that state that a rune weapon and shield doesn't give you a +1 in CC because it is a trait that handweapons lose once you put a rune on it, does this hold?

flain
07-11-2006, 13:39
The shiled/hand weapon combo didn't work in the 6th edition with magical shield and/or magical hand weapons. However, the rule that prevented this has been deleted from the 7th edition rulebook. So now it is perfectly legal to claim the +1 save from shield/hand weapon combo in CC.

But on topic: the dwarf lord is on foot. But it is more that he cann't be placed in any other category that makes him an infantry model. And I cann;t really see him getting effected by spells which effect cavalry :P

NakedFisherman
07-11-2006, 13:44
No, it's only possible to have +1 armour save with a normal hand weapon and a magical shield or normal shield. The key is that the hand weapon must be exactly that: a hand weapon! Magical weapons (besides the Sword of the Quest) are not hand weapons.

Morghat
07-11-2006, 14:15
Btw I do not think the shield bearers are such a big problem: of course they give additional AS, make the Lord immune to Killing Blow and add two (weak) attacks, but all that doesn't change the Lord M, wich means if the enemy doesn't want to fight him he will not probably see combat.


what about this rune (dont know the name) but if dwarf character use it then you have to charge him ;)

WLBjork
07-11-2006, 14:56
If Haquim thinks WS5, S4 attacks are weak, i'd hate to know that he thinks of WS2, S3 attacks.

Also, it's harder to avoid Dwarfs than many people claim. For starters, a huge chunk of points resides in the Lord and his Bodyguard (usually Hammerers), so by ignoring them you ignore a big chunk of VPs. Additionally, Dwarfs can always march, so although they can't move 8" a turn, someone can be within 8" and suddenly the Dwarfs are 2" away from them.

Dogskills
07-11-2006, 18:17
He's a unique model, and the silliness comes more from the idea of 2 dwarfs carrying their lord around on a serving platter than anything else. If you can believe that, everything else falls into place. :rolleyes:


Well actually I have no problem beliving in it, when Swedens warrior king Carl XII was wounded in one of his campains in Russia he was carried in a sort of chair, and fought from it at the front.

xmbk
07-11-2006, 18:20
Well actually I have no problem beliving in it, when Swedens warrior king Carl XII was wounded in one of his campains in Russia he was carried in a sort of chair, and fought from it at the front.


Ahh, the things they fool the peasants with. ;) Good to see that photo ops aren't just a 20th Century political phenomenon.

Dogskills
07-11-2006, 20:27
Peasant ! Pff, I happend to be there and saw it live. Yes I have a time machine that is the only way to keep record of relayable history documents.....

Haquim
13-11-2006, 14:56
If Haquim thinks WS5, S4 attacks are weak, i'd hate to know that he thinks of WS2, S3 attacks.

Also, it's harder to avoid Dwarfs than many people claim. For starters, a huge chunk of points resides in the Lord and his Bodyguard (usually Hammerers), so by ignoring them you ignore a big chunk of VPs. Additionally, Dwarfs can always march, so although they can't move 8" a turn, someone can be within 8" and suddenly the Dwarfs are 2" away from them.

Look, they are weak compared to the "things" who usually dare charging your Lord. They work well agaist infantry and sometimes even work against "medium" chivalry (in my book Silver Helms, Cold one knights and the like, not Chosen or Bretonnian knights...), but they usually don't do anything against the things a Dwarf Lord could fear.

About avoiding dwarves: it's true the Lord unit is a lot of points, but they are DIFFICULT points to get in HtH, that's why most people I know shoot against the lord unit but never dare coming in HtH with it. And moving with dwarves is VERY difficult, you have to avoid being flanked, something quite hard to accomplish with dwarves (slow as they are), and so most people choose to use defensive tactics with them (besides a fast army has the flexibility it needs to avoid dwarven units anyway...).

It's true one can give the M.R. of the challange to a thane with the lord unit(I usually do it...:rolleyes: ) and that will force the enemy to choose between charging or fleeing (works really well against Tzeentch dragon armies...:D ) if they are not immune to psicology, even so the unit as powerful as it is will rarely be carged and will rarely repay its huge cost.

Jedi152
13-11-2006, 15:02
I think it's fair that he's counted as being on foot. The things you are inhibited in doing if you're mounted (only +1 to S instead of +2 for GW's) takes into consideration that a soldier has to control his mount, and hold reins etc. at all times, especially when he's fighting.

A dwarf lord with shieldbearers doesn't have this encumbrance.

NakedFisherman
13-11-2006, 15:55
It's true one can give the M.R. of the challange to a thane with the lord unit(I usually do it...:rolleyes: ) and that will force the enemy to choose between charging or fleeing (works really well against Tzeentch dragon armies...:D ) if they are not immune to psicology, even so the unit as powerful as it is will rarely be carged and will rarely repay its huge cost.

It doesn't need to 'repay its huge cost'. It just needs to sit there and threaten the enemy. The unit is hundreds of VPs locked away that the opponent can't get and is constantly threatened by.

It's also not hard to get it in combat, really.

Haquim
16-11-2006, 13:29
It doesn't need to 'repay its huge cost'. It just needs to sit there and threaten the enemy. The unit is hundreds of VPs locked away that the opponent can't get and is constantly threatened by.

It's also not hard to get it in combat, really.

You mean "can't get unless the enemy has cannons, bolt throwers and the like...", and there are preciously few armies without shooting (VC, and chaos without the Hell Cannon), of course the dwarves can try to destroy the enemy's shooting weapons but it's very unlikely they can do it in few turns (having such a costy unit forces you to reduce the number of artillery pieces).
About bringing it into combat... of course you can, ut then you risk being flanked and badly outnumbered. You'll probably won't flee combat, yet you will probably be forced to fight against goblins, skavenslaves and the like, while the rest of the enemy's army will butcher your troops... As I said before advancing with the lord unit is rarely a good idea, IMHO.

Thargrund
16-11-2006, 16:10
A dward lord is not mounted if on shieldbearers since:

a) he doesnt move a different rate
b) has the same unit strength (i think)
c) doesnt have the correct mounted base size
d) im sure it says so in the book...

NakedFisherman
16-11-2006, 16:28
You mean "can't get unless the enemy has cannons, bolt throwers and the like...", and there are preciously few armies without shooting (VC, and chaos without the Hell Cannon), of course the dwarves can try to destroy the enemy's shooting weapons but it's very unlikely they can do it in few turns (having such a costy unit forces you to reduce the number of artillery pieces).
About bringing it into combat... of course you can, ut then you risk being flanked and badly outnumbered. You'll probably won't flee combat, yet you will probably be forced to fight against goblins, skavenslaves and the like, while the rest of the enemy's army will butcher your troops... As I said before advancing with the lord unit is rarely a good idea, IMHO.

I don't see how a 25-point upgrade changes anything about how a Dwarf army plays. It makes a tough character exponentially tougher.

12-point models are hardly costly considering their stats.

EvC
16-11-2006, 16:57
He specifically does not have the same unit strength, which is one of the key aspects of the discussion.

Festus
16-11-2006, 17:37
Hi

A dward lord is not mounted if on shieldbearers since:

a) he doesnt move a different rate
Not a requirement: You can be mounted and still move the same (Skink on a Stegadon does IIRC, or does it?).

b) has the same unit strength (i think) Nope, he has a different US.

c) doesnt have the correct mounted base sizeOh, is there a *mounted base size*? I know about cavalry bases, monster bases, Infantry bases, 40mm square, 20 mm, 25mm, 50mm and even 40x60mm, but i've never heard of *mounted bases*

d) im sure it says so in the book...Are you sure? :)

Festus

TheWarSmith
16-11-2006, 17:39
More specifically, he's even US3, which makes him immune to killing blow.

Mezziah
18-11-2006, 13:29
More specifically, he's even US3, which makes him immune to killing blow.

Where does it state that models with 3 wounds are immune to killing blow? Arenīt just all mansized units affected?
If models with 3 wounds are immune to KB that would mean all lords are immune (cuz every lord Iīve seen has at least 3 wounds, some have 4 or more)

I havenīt seen any rule that would make my Carstein vampire lord immune to the effects of killing blow.

Festus
18-11-2006, 14:10
Hi

Where does it state that models with 3 wounds are immune to killing blow? Arenīt just all mansized units affected?
If models with 3 wounds are immune to KB that would mean all lords are immune (cuz every lord Iīve seen has at least 3 wounds, some have 4 or more)

I havenīt seen any rule that would make my Carstein vampire lord immune to the effects of killing blow.
Read again what the WarSmith wrote: He is US 3! It is not the Wounds, but the US. Killig Blow only works on Mansized Models of US2 or less.

Festus

Mezziah
19-11-2006, 23:11
Ah, sorry :p

I blame it on beeing tired...

Mordu22
22-11-2006, 04:33
Got into a huge argument about this one tonight, my VC oppent (ended up tying) was getting so pissed about not bieng able to hurt my lord. Pure defense rune of resistence, stone, and Mrof Iron. Plus spite. Anyways I ended up getting him to go with the not mounted. If he was mounted, and all attacks go against a person and not their mount etc. etc. Where are the stats for his mount? Without anystats except for a dwarflord with shield bearers i cannot see how one can say that one model is mounted on another. If you are trying to say this you are going by what the model looks like, in which case how do you get into base contact with a lord on shield bearers? he is us 3 immune to killing blow;)

sever14
22-11-2006, 13:31
I think the problem is with how GW portrayed the shieldbearers, if you look back at the greeks who used shieldbearers, they were lightly armored infantry that carried shields and fought by a lord or general and protected him with their shields to the best of their ability. They never carried the lord on the shield. I mean thats just putting a huge bullseye on him. So the way i look at it is two dwarfs with shields helping protect their lord, which gives him the 2 extra attacks and armor bonus. I dont think they would actually carry him on a shield. I think GW just did this to make the model look "cool". Thats just my take on it, use it how you will.