Dwarf Bear Rider: Requesting input

[GrottoKnight]

Wanted to get the opinion of fellow dwarf players as well as other warhammer players as to the balance on this model. Mind you, I have played with the same group of 10 or so for the last 16 years and we are very friendly with character creation. I did this for a Blood in the Badlands campaign I am running but plan to use him in more games with opponent knowledge. He is created from the shield bearers as a template. Let me know if you feel anything should be lower/raised, added/removed, and any other fun or creative ideas. Some of you out there may have already done this with the old Kislev polar bear model. One person suggested dropping Devestating Charge and adding Fear. I feel this takes away from being a bear only thing and that fear would affect a whole opposing unit which is unfair and should raise the points cost. Stomp is for monstrous base models but does not have to be part of his rules.

This is the reaper model with a dwarf on bear http://home.comcast.net/~silashand/W...ng_on_bear.jpg

40mm base, upgrade for Lord only, model removed as a whole


80 points
GRIZZLAR (what I called a bear )
M-6/WS-3/BS-x/S-5/T-x/W-x/ I-2/A-3/LD-5

Weapons and Armour: Claws and Teeth

SPEACIAL RULES
Monstrous Cavalry (Stomp)
Devastating Charge (+1 attack the turn it charges)

UNIQUE RULES
A Dwarf Lord commands respect when any Dwarf knows he is near. A Dwarf General riding to battle on a bear entirely focused on shredding their enemy takes the respect and raises it to an inspired new level.
Commanding Respect: When a Dwarf General uses a bear mount his Inspiring Presence of 12" is instead raised to 18" as the sheer height and the sounds of its vicious growl add to the booming voice of the General.

Winters Coat and Thick Hide: Grizzlar passes along a +2 to the armour save.

[Zaszz]

I think it looks quite fair. Agree with you about fear as well. I'd actually like to see 1 more special rule for it, and make it unable to join units as well. Maybe give it some kind of growing fury rule, where the lower wounds the lord gets the angrier the mount becomes, or perhaps have it based on the turn if you wanted a more awakening from hibernation feel.

I'd also think from a fluff standpoint that a lord wouldnt likly have a bear as I expect he wouldnt really leave his strong hold. I could see a ranger type character having tamed them however, and I think that would be really neat. Like a ranger with a bear mount and they hunt giant monsters, could give it a couple special rules and a great weapon ranger to help slay big monsters. Alternatly I suppose if during their digging they dug into a cave a bear was using as a hibernation den, and saw it mangle the hell out of a butt load of skaven or goblins, then maybe they could befriend it, so I suppose a lord could get a bear mount.

Eitherway I think your rules are fair and fun, I'd def allow you to field it against me.

[theunwantedbeing]

1. Dock the +2 bonus armour save, make it a normal mounted bonus of +1. You do not need to be able to get a 1+ save without using a master rune or a sheild.

2. Make the bear a large target, this does exactly what your own rule does...albeit in a more sensible way and uses a rule that already exists.

Otherwise it seems perfectly reasonable.
Although it is completely unfluffy and an abomination that should never exist :P

[GrottoKnight]

1. Dock the +2 bonus armour save, make it a normal mounted bonus of +1. You do not need to be able to get a 1+ save without using a master rune or a sheild.

2. Make the bear a large target, this does exactly what your own rule does...albeit in a more sensible way and uses a rule that already exists.

Otherwise it seems perfectly reasonable.
Although it is completely unfluffy and an abomination that should never exist :P

Dropping to a +1 for the mount would be fine, I would drop the whole rule "winters coat and thick hide".
Since I used the Shield-"bear"-ers as the template this is why I gave +2 just like they gave the Lord.
also
It wouldn't be a biggie as the Lord can get a shield for 3pts or Rune of Stone for 5pts and he comes with 4+ Gromril already so wither one plus the mount would give him a 1+. The way I had my character built I would end up with only a 3+ re-rollable which is still good at T5.

Totally agree on the Large Target! Thanks, this is exactly why I posted this. Got a smack of GW logic and a "why didn't I think of that".

[Little Joe]

Well Ursun had this profile at 90 points:
M-6/WS-4/BS-x/S-6/T-5/W-3/ I-4/A-4/LD-7

I think WS should be 4 to show a dwarf would not fight with something less skilled, S5 and A3 is fine. Initiative should be higher then 2 (average dwarf), but less then a lord (I4) to show he is still in command so a 3 will do.
Wounds would naturally be three due to the Monstrous Cavalry rule, beasts can have up to two and after checking the model I think 2 might do. It does not matter really anyhow, since the shared profile will obliterate the result. Would work if you would want to use a thane on it though. Base size should decide on this though, if you want to put it into units 40mm would make it a beast and 50mm for monstrous cavalry. If it is a beast it should not have stomp.
Now the points make it very expensive for little real gain to your lord other then more combat ability. And the points demand it to be Monstrous Cavalry. Speed does not really help unless you want to hunt war machines with a dwarf lord on bear.

I will go the ranger route with some altered Scibor bears, which I will add riders to myself using the Ursine profile with A3/I2, Avatars of War are going to do bear cavalry as well in time for their dwarf army (and dwarf bear warriors!).

EDIT: thick hide should stay, it is something a dwarf would naturally respect and want in a mount: durability.

[Dreadaxe]

My vision
http://dl.dropbox.co...20Nordiques.pdf

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/5...ainsnordiq.jpg