Warhammer Armies Dwarfs (Player Edition)

[Lyynark]

Can you be more specific on this part? Dwarf anti-magic is less powerful in this list with the loss of flat Dispel Dice bonuses. Instead they get characteristic test re-rolls which are a relatively weak bonus, the aim being to make hurting them directly more difficult, but Augments and Hexes will still serve just as well, since the Dwarf army is no longer as good as spell prevention. Instead Dwarfs get some weak magic of their own to wield, but with no casting bonuses and fairly weak effects they're still only a minor player in the magic phase, having to work hard to get off the spells they need. Since Runesmiths needs to buy their spells they're also not cheap as mages.

Well, we all know that the excessive DD bonuses has to go. If anything the 8th edition Empire army book has proven that. A dwarf army will always dispel as if they had a lvl 4 wizard in their army. I fail to see how that is bad. And with a runelord they have +5 which is pretty awesome. Coupled with the ability to channel and the re-roll I would say that the dwarf army still has some very potent magic defence. By the way, multiple runes of spellbreaking should not be possible to do, they should be one per army.

Well, first of all you've actually given them a magic phase. While I can agree on the sentiment of this you're downplaying the importance a bit too much. First of all, they would have a +2 casting modifier since they are effectively lvl 2 wizards. Secondly, they don't need to worry about miscasts, so a dwarf player can safely chuck six PD on any spell. This is quite potent.

And yes, the only way for you to get an actual magic phase is by buying a runelord with an anvil of doom. But even a naked RL with AoD costs a measly 290 points. And for that you get very good protection, also the runelord is quite capable of protecting himself. Compare this to lord level casters in other armies and you will see that given your perks you are actually ahead in the value you get for the points you pay in quite a lot of circumstances. Also, the lore you've constructed has some quite potent spells, especially the signature one.

Well, I haven't seen the new Steam Tank rules but I'll need to see what its damage output is like. The aim with the Death Roller is to have it relatively weak except on the charge; once it's in its supposed to be very hard to shift. My main comparison has been to things like dragons; it has less damage output by comparison as its crew are just normal in Strength, and it doesn't get Thunderstomp, so a dragon, Stonehorn etc. meanwhile will churn out effectively twice the attacks in combat. The points are probably wildly out but I'm no good at putting an initial cost on things

To keep things brief, the ST is now a random movement chariot that (while not as badly as before) suffer from performance degradation when taking damage. In the optimal case it will inflict 3D3+1D6 S6 Impact hits. Quite destructive, but it has been reduced to T6 (was T10 as per Empire 8th errata). The ST still cannot act in the opponents phase and if it doesn't get the charge it won't be doing much damage at all.

Point is, having T8 and a 2+ AS at the same time on a stubborn unit (with Ld9) is much too good. Also, the damage output of the death roller is quite respectable, but I don't see why it shouldn't be using the artillery dice to determine impact hits every turn? Also, why classify it as a war machine when it is clearly a chariot. Just make it a chariot and be done with it.

For which weapons? They're already a point more, so I think 10 points for Hand Weapon & Shield is plenty, since Shield Wall only helps them when charged to the front. Great Weapons are also slightly more expensive, but don't die any less quickly.

The majority of the charges in almost any given game will be to the front.
Thing is, for a measly ten points they get, WS4, T4, and Ld9 compared to the normal human statline this is huge. Yes, they do suffer from only having I2, but with the re-roll they are actually slightly better off than I3 versus those spells. In normal combat the low initiative is offset by great toughness and armour save (not to mention the ability to have great weapons). The only real drawback is their M3, but with the charge rules of 8th that is only a minor impediment.

I'm not sure about this, firstly, why drop Longbeard rangers? They're in the current book and it doesn't seem right to have Josef Bugman leading anything else. Unless you mean to make Longbeards possible as an upgrade, but I think it's easier to have them as separate entries since they're intended for slightly different things; forest rangers are the basic scout with options to represent all current, non-Longbeard types. Mountain Rangers are basically an advanced ranged unit, pretty much intended to either be charged, or otherwise slow the enemy down while your army moves up. Longbeard Rangers are for (expensive) flexibility.

I was about to write that yesterday but my post was already far to long. But yes, longbeards should be an upgrade available for certain units in the dwarf army list, much in the same was as Big 'Uns in the O&G army. Makes the list cleaner and you're not loosing out. Also, longbeards should not make other units immune to panic. The dwarf army is implacable enough as it is.

Straight up against regular chaos warriors the Ironbreakers only suffer slightly less wounds per round in the long-run. Against more typical Chaos Warriors (with Halberds) they're exactly even. So while they might be perhaps a point or two undercosted I think they're actually not far off in the end. Bearing in mind that compared to the current (overcosted) Ironbreakers they are 2 points more expensive for +1 armour and +1 to Parry, with the extra +1 if charged to the front. Which is kind of the crux of the matter; their defence bonuses aren't worth much if flanked, and they're still Dwarfs so not the speediest.

CWs do have a higher damage output since they have two attacks per model and in a one on one fight the CWs will probably win versus ironbreakers. But it will be an extremely slow grind. that won't favour the chaos player in any way. But, the thing is, most other armies cannot even hope to field any unit that can even compare to CWs. In my case my best bet is greatswords or demigryph knights, and even those would be hard pressed to win. Ironbreakers are effectively an unkillable and unbreakable block for most other armies.


On a different note, you have a ridiculous amount of special characters in the list. I would advise on you having a round of "kill your darlings" and bring those down to between six and eight (seems to be the current standard in 8th ed. army books). Also, you didn't answer why you designed the character selection process the way you did?

[Haravikk]

And with a runelord they have +5 which is pretty awesome.

I think you've misunderstood some of the changes. They still only have the normal +2 to Dispel (I just put it in the army book), so a Runesmith doesn't have any bonus (they effectively just channel and that's it, so you'd need 6 for the equivalent of a current Runesmith ), so a Runelord only gets a +3 bonus, or +4 on an Anvil of Doom. So they only really have the dispel capability of a regular level 2 wizard or a level 3 or 4, with the latter requiring a fairly hefty investment. The result being that they're pretty normal for dispelling, except they have the characteristic re-roll to make instant-kill spells less damaging, and their natural Toughness helps with regular damaging spells, but they remain vulnerable to properly used Augments and Hexes.

Also, a Runelord of Anvil of Doom is above the cost of a typical level 4 wizard, but only has the casting bonus of a level 2. Probably could do with some more of a points bump to account for the extra defensive bonuses though. The thing with the Anvil is that with it unable to move the spells are unlimited range, I was however thinking of having them require line of sight, but be able to use other Runesmiths/Runelords for line of sight, sort of like a Slaan, so taking just a Runelord on Anvil of Doom wouldn't be a brilliant idea, meaning its effective cost would be at least 360 points once you factor in a Runesmith "spotter".

By the way, multiple runes of spellbreaking should not be possible to do, they should be one per army.

They are, it's a Master rune in my list.

First of all, they would have a +2 casting modifier since they are effectively lvl 2 wizards.

Only a Runelord on Anvil of Doom has a wizard level, otherwise Runesmiths and Runelords are only counts-as wizards for the purposes of dispel attempts and channeling. With innate spells they don't miscast, but they'll struggle to cast much since they're likely going to be facing enemies with at least a +2 advantage. I was thinking of making Irresistible Force impossible as well though, but I'm undecided as I kind of thought they should be able to throw dice at a spell to make sure it goes off, since it costs them the ability to cast much more since they've no way to generate additional dice. It means the Dwarfs will be lucky to get a couple of spells off, and by having to purchase the the spells they want to be able to cast they go up in cost quickly unless you build with a single spell only in mind, even then they're starting to go towards a level 2 wizard in cost.

Point is, having T8 and a 2+ AS at the same time on a stubborn unit (with Ld9) is much too good. Also, the damage output of the death roller is quite respectable, but I don't see why it shouldn't be using the artillery dice to determine impact hits every turn? Also, why classify it as a war machine when it is clearly a chariot. Just make it a chariot and be done with it.

I'm not disagreeing completely, just trying to highlight what I'm going for, since its damage output is aimed to be about half that of a proper monster. The reason for classifying it as a war machine is for the purposes of anything that specifically affects war-machines, as its not really a true chariot either, since it moves under its own power.

Thing is, for a measly ten points they get, WS4, T4, and Ld9 compared to the normal human statline this is huge. Yes, they do suffer from only having I2, but with the re-roll they are actually slightly better off than I3 versus those spells. In normal combat the low initiative is offset by great toughness and armour save (not to mention the ability to have great weapons). The only real drawback is their M3, but with the charge rules of 8th that is only a minor impediment.

I know what you mean, but in games I've played with current Dwarfs I've not felt they're really over-costed except the Great Weapon units more than anything. Still, they maybe do need a bit more with the extra ways to bolster them; but again it's worth remembering that since they're still vulnerable to Augments and Hexes that this is a pretty potent way of tipping the balance as Toughness 4 doesn't mean much against an enemy with magically boosted Strength, or when suffering from a Toughness penalty etc.

CWs do have a higher damage output since they have two attacks per model and in a one on one fight the CWs will probably win versus ironbreakers. But it will be an extremely slow grind. that won't favour the chaos player in any way.

Well, it is kind of their point. 18 points feels too high, as there are still plenty of good ways to hurt them. A Mindrazored unit will ignore most of (or all of) their armour save and chew through them quite happily for example. Armies with cheaper units can fairly affordably Disrupt them, which makes remaining in combat difficult without a Thane or Lord to lead them. Their damage output is also still fairly low, despite their Strength 4, so they can even just be tar-pitted themselves.

Also, you didn't answer why you designed the character selection process the way you did?

My list's been that way for a while, I originally did it because it seemed neater at the time as I couldn't fit them all on one page otherwise, plus they were originally more of an upgrade for a single basic character type, it just kind of expanded again to the point it probably is just more annoying than anything. Probably could fit it in separate entries since I've found some better ways of saving space now.