You Write the FAQ/Errata: Bretonnia

[The bearded one]

There still sore - ill get him next time, learned a lot from that loss , even after all these years.

not to fail panic tests?

[sulla]

Thoughts? Am I making brets too cheap?

Only thing too cheap in your wishlist is the trebuchet. A stone thrower in O&G or TK costs around 100pts but does a third of the kills vs a t3 unit that a s5 one does.

On that basis, I'd probably cost it at 150pts and reduce it's strength to s4(10). Give it some funky anti building rule too. Maybe 2d6 hits vs buildings instead of d6? Or if that's too powerful (they would be godly in SoM), reroll the d6 for hits in buildings?

[Urgat]

A regular knight will never get devastating charge, that much I can tell you. Looking at the recent releases, I'm not too sure what will get that rule, to be honest.

[vcassano]

Okay, so my idea is, GW calls you up and says, we want you to write the book. FAQs can change point values and some rule wordings, but not stats, and you can't add units. Then, because they're feeling generous, they hand you a copy of the Empire book and say, use this as a baseline.

Where would you price our units? Which Bret rules would you rewrite?

1. Blessing: I would keep it the same, but make it also give devastating charge.
2. Lance Formation: Ranks of 3, Horde formation at 6. It makes it weaker than currently, but more in line with the book.

Units:

1. Bowman: Points seem reasonable given low leadership and lack of other buffs.
2. Men-At-Arms: 4pts
3. Knights Errant: At 20 pts, they seem fair compared to the new empire knights (they have a better charge, but weaker armour, leadership, and a built-in penalty)
4. KOTR: 24 points. With devastating charge and the Lance, they're probably worth a couple more points than current knights.
5. Questing Knights: 25 pts. Given their limitations, I'd put them on par with Inner Circle Knights
6. Squires: 15 points with spears
7. Peg knights: 60 pts. (in line with other monstrous cav -- Flying is the equiv of more attacks/better save)
8. Grail Knights: 30 points. That's still very expensive for a T3, 1W model, but will let you field enough to put out a lot of attacks.
9. Treb: 120 pts (seems that 120 is a points cost GW likes)
10. Reliquary and peasants: probably in the neighbourhood of 8pts/model.

Thoughts? Am I making brets too cheap?

A pretty reasonable set of suggestions; my only suggestion would be that the Blessing is granted automatically (always going second is silly), offers devastating charge but the save is only functional against ranged attacks.

[laribold]

Okay, so my idea is, GW calls you up and says, we want you to write the book. FAQs can change point values and some rule wordings, but not stats, and you can't add units. Then, because they're feeling generous, they hand you a copy of the Empire book and say, use this as a baseline.

Where would you price our units? Which Bret rules would you rewrite?

1. Blessing: I would keep it the same, but make it also give devastating charge.
2. Lance Formation: Ranks of 3, Horde formation at 6. It makes it weaker than currently, but more in line with the book.

Units:

1. Bowman: Points seem reasonable given low leadership and lack of other buffs.
2. Men-At-Arms: 4pts
3. Knights Errant: At 20 pts, they seem fair compared to the new empire knights (they have a better charge, but weaker armour, leadership, and a built-in penalty)
4. KOTR: 24 points. With devastating charge and the Lance, they're probably worth a couple more points than current knights.
5. Questing Knights: 25 pts. Given their limitations, I'd put them on par with Inner Circle Knights
6. Squires: 15 points with spears
7. Peg knights: 60 pts. (in line with other monstrous cav -- Flying is the equiv of more attacks/better save)
8. Grail Knights: 30 points. That's still very expensive for a T3, 1W model, but will let you field enough to put out a lot of attacks.
9. Treb: 120 pts (seems that 120 is a points cost GW likes)
10. Reliquary and peasants: probably in the neighbourhood of 8pts/model.

Thoughts? Am I making brets too cheap?

I agree, some nice errata amends here. The only other one I'd like to see would be to scap Impetuous and replace with Frenzy for Knight Errants. Currently they have the bad side of frenzy without any benefit, so this uses a BRB rule to replace a special AB one plus helps to differentiate the different types of Knights a little more.

[Von Wibble]

Okay, so my idea is, GW calls you up and says, we want you to write the book. FAQs can change point values and some rule wordings, but not stats, and you can't add units. Then, because they're feeling generous, they hand you a copy of the Empire book and say, use this as a baseline.

Where would you price our units? Which Bret rules would you rewrite?

1. Blessing: I would keep it the same, but make it also give devastating charge.

Imo Blessing should not protect you in combat. It should protect you from missile fire and magic. I would therefore make the blessing give a ward of 5+ against shooting, 4+ against shooting of S5 or more, and +2 to dispel attempts.
Devastating charge is good, but should be a unit special rule and charged for as such.

2. Lance Formation: Ranks of 3, Horde formation at 6. It makes it weaker than currently, but more in line with the book.

Looks good

Units:

1. Bowman: Points seem reasonable given low leadership and lack of other buffs.
2. Men-At-Arms: 4pts
3. Knights Errant: At 20 pts, they seem fair compared to the new empire knights (they have a better charge, but weaker armour, leadership, and a built-in penalty)

Given devastating charge I'd pump these up to 22 points

4. KOTR: 24 points. With devastating charge and the Lance, they're probably worth a couple more points than current knights.

Fair enough
5. Questing Knights: 25 pts. Given their limitations, I'd put them on par with Inner Circle Knights

Again this is fine
6. Squires: 15 points with spears
7. Peg knights: 60 pts. (in line with other monstrous cav -- Flying is the equiv of more attacks/better save)
8. Grail Knights: 30 points. That's still very expensive for a T3, 1W model, but will let you field enough to put out a lot of attacks.

Squires are fine. Peg Knights probably are too. Grail knights I'd say 36 points - devastating charge for them is huge

9. Treb: 120 pts (seems that 120 is a points cost GW likes)

20 more than a mortar for +2S, in an army that supposedly prefers honourable combat?!! I think not. Reduce to S3, for 120 points
10. Reliquary and peasants: probably in the neighbourhood of 8pts/model.
I would have the reliquary give all knightly units, or units with a character with a knightly vow, within 12" stubborn. An army with a reliquary must use the blessing.

Thoughts? Am I making brets too cheap?

Overall, yes, I think you are making them too cheap.

[Von Wibble]

A regular knight will never get devastating charge, that much I can tell you. Looking at the recent releases, I'm not too sure what will get that rule, to be honest.

Yes, I'd have expected Boar Boyz and Ogres to be obvious recipients yet neither got it. And to be fair the description of the rule doesn't fit Brets, just the mechanic.

[teddet]

Overall, yes, I think you are making them too cheap.

I think if they keep the lance formation as it is AND give them devastating charge, then yes, the points would have to go up a bit. But if they change the lance formation to "ranks of 3" only, then I'm not sure it's terrible. Currently, a unit of 12 knights in lance formation gets 11 attacks on the charge (including the free champion), and 9 attacks from the horses. If you revised lance formation, but gave them devastating charge, a lance of 12 knights would get 10 attacks on the charge, and 3 attacks from the horses. Obviously it's not exactly the same because the old lance formation loses attacks at 2 wounds, and this one wouldn't lose attacks before taking 7 wounds, but it's still pretty comparable. Since people seem to think that brets are only slighty overcosted, if at all, I think the switch would be fair.

Obviously, devastating charge would mean you could go wider for even more attacks (4 wide would add another 3 knight attacks and 1 from the horse). Of course, the wider you go, the more you struggle to break ranks.

I don't mind the current lance formation, I just think that it will be "streamlined" in a new book, and I think Ranks of 3/Devasting Charge (ONLY with the blessing) is a pretty decent way to do that.

As for not getting the blessing in HTH -- I'm agnostic on that. I think it's currently a neat way to show that Bretonnia survives by being more "magical" than the Empire. I wouldn't take it away, but I wouldn't stop playing if it went away.

And as for the treb, I think the consensus is that the mortar got "double-nerfed" and that it's not worth its points at 100. I'm not sure the brets should pay a penalty for that, so I think 120 is still fair. However, i also recognize that it will probably be nerfed in any new book -- I'm just trying to go for what I think would be a "fair" cost.

[Havock]

Just give the front rank 'devastating charge', so you just get 3 extra attacks. Slight advantage but it is a fairly elegant solution. It also allows the bret characters to punch above their weight when charging, which is fair, imho.

[teddet]

Just give the front rank 'devastating charge', so you just get 3 extra attacks. Slight advantage but it is a fairly elegant solution. It also allows the bret characters to punch above their weight when charging, which is fair, imho.

Unless I'm really mistaken, I think that's what giving the whole thing devastating charge would do, no? There's nothing in the rules that gives back ranks permission to make more than one attack -- it would be the same as with frenzy, or anything else. The front row would get its full complement of attacks, and back ranks would get 1 for the rider.

[Havock]

Not really, in lance formation, the 'flanks' get their full attacks.

[King Arthur]

People think that Brett's are overpowered cos they have a different army playing style cos not many armies are not good against heavily armoured and most armies are now infantry so can t take the manoeuvrability of the army an advantage of cavalry being Under powered?

[ihavetoomuchminis]

So happy no Bret player here is writing the new army book. It would become the new Daemons. As if having Knights with a 5+ ward save against anything that can reliably kill them, wich receive less attacks than a normal cavalry unit, while adding ranks cheaper than many infantry units (therefore making it easier to remove steadfast from enemy units) while paying the cost of what normal knights cost in other armies wasn't enough.....

[Lantern]

So happy no Bret player here is writing the new army book. It would become the new Daemons. As if having Knights with a 5+ ward save against anything that can reliably kill them, which receive less attacks than a normal cavalry unit, while adding ranks cheaper than many infantry units (therefore making it easier to remove steadfast from enemy units) while paying the cost of what normal knights cost in other armies wasn't enough.....

All without cannons and hand gunners to provide covering fire and remove enemy ranks in swathes ,or overwhelming magic to buff and obliterate, all whilst having to deal with horded up and steadfast units. I don't think there is any great call for a Bretonnian overhaul, just a few tweaks to take into consideration the new edition of Warhammer where magic and infantry are now king.

[Urgat]

Yes, I'd have expected Boar Boyz and Ogres to be obvious recipients yet neither got it. And to be fair the description of the rule doesn't fit Brets, just the mechanic.

Yeah, I was thinking of those. Also, if things like stonehorns, sphinxes, dragons (the Imperial dragon is a proper 8th ed dragon) or steam tanks don't get it, people can wishlist it all they want for Brets, they're dreaming.I'm foreseeing the knights staying exactly the same as they are now, I'm not even sure they'll get a point drop. What will be cool and cheap(ish. I don't find they're going overboard these days, really) will be the new kits that will serve as alternatives to the old knights (giant "monster/warmachine" dualkit, monstrous cavalry, etc).

[teddet]

Not really, in lance formation, the 'flanks' get their full attacks.

Yeah -- but I was arguing that the lance formation should be "normalized" to ranks of 3, and THEN give them devastating charge. I agree that if the lance was kept the same, they probably don't need devastating charge, and would have to go up in points if they did.

So happy no Bret player here is writing the new army book. It would become the new Daemons. As if having Knights with a 5+ ward save against anything that can reliably kill them, wich receive less attacks than a normal cavalry unit, while adding ranks cheaper than many infantry units (therefore making it easier to remove steadfast from enemy units) while paying the cost of what normal knights cost in other armies wasn't enough.....

I think you're reading all the "best" changes together -- I think most people's suggestions have been balanced. And the cheapest price suggested for a knight was 20 for a KE. So that would be 60 pts for a rank -- that's the SAME as 12pts per model for infantry. Which to me means, they're NOT adding ranks cheaper than infantry. In fact, they're more expensive than most infantry, and your rank has 3 wounds instead of 5.

And, the point of the thread in the first place was to guess/suggest what the "normal" cost of a knight is after the Empire book -- since other armies don't have "normal human" knights. I think most of what people have suggested is pretty reasonable.

(And yes -- I'm arguing about tiny plastic men, and I will have NO control over the book, so it's not a big deal if you feel differently , I'm just having some fun making suggestions.)

[Echunia]

20 more than a mortar for +2S, in an army that supposedly prefers honourable combat?!! I think not. Reduce to S3, for 120 points

Ok, now your just being ignorant. A s3 stonethrower usually costs less than 90 pts. There is no reason a bret s3 stonethrower would cost 120 pts. Personally I say 100 pts s4. I go of the TK thrower that costs 90 pts with magical flaming attacks as well as extra panic. If bret stonethrower was immovable and s3 I would probably price it at 85, like the goblin one.

120 points for a s3 stone thrower is just plain ridiculous...

[vcassano]

120 points for a s3 stone thrower is just plain ridiculous...

Hello scraplauncher!*

Pricing doesn't always work as a direct correlation between armies, and in an army which shouldn't really be castling up in the backfield I can understand that points value. However it will likely use the small template so should not cost that much.

* Yes it is a chariot, but so is pretty much all of the Ogre Army in a way.

[Echunia]

Hello scraplauncher!*

Pricing doesn't always work as a direct correlation between armies, and in an army which shouldn't really be castling up in the backfield I can understand that points value. However it will likely use the small template so should not cost that much.

* Yes it is a chariot, but so is pretty much all of the Ogre Army in a way.

It also has killing blow...
The more you know!
It also has a good save and good combat stats, making it hard to kill off ---> worth it's points.

[theunwantedbeing]

Fixing the trebuchet is easy.
When it came out it was simply a more powerful stone thrower that was unable to move.
So we keep it following the same design rules.
Giving it a damage of 4(10) rather than 3(9), solved and the cost remains the same as stone throwers haven't gone up in cost.