PDA

View Full Version : do you think GW should come out with rules for your own special character?



lowmanjason
19-03-2010, 19:32
they had a chapter aproved with a guide for making your own vehicals and warmachines, what about special characters. i think it would be pretty cool and it would give a lot of momentum to people who like to do convertions. and to me, it seems it wouldnt take that long to produce a good set of rules and points values and options and wargear and what not! what do you think? :)

edit---please replace the "now" option with "no"

Sunfang
19-03-2010, 19:33
No not so much. As it stands now things are already on pace for Herohammer.

Griffindale
19-03-2010, 19:36
Yes, IF they could do it right. If there was some way I could make a really cool special character and just give him one, maybe two, cool special rules it would be awesome. It would definitely add a more narrative aspect to the game with people playing their own personalized characters.

But I would not want them to do it at all if they couldn't do it in a well thought out and balanced manner.

The pestilent 1
19-03-2010, 19:37
It's be pretty fun for "Guidelines" (Like +5pts for +1str or whatever) but Most deffinately not tourny legal ones.

lowmanjason
19-03-2010, 19:38
one rule can limit the amount per army to say... only 1!!!:)
and that you cant use any other special characters in the your codex maybe...

CrownAxe
19-03-2010, 19:43
You can do this own your own, no need for GW to do it for you

The only reason to get them involved to make doing so tournament legal

Lord Damocles
19-03-2010, 19:44
I assume the 'now' option should read 'no'?


Also: No.

Vesica
19-03-2010, 19:45
It would be nice to have guidelines.

I know i could make my own but i don't think many people would like a Bike riding, jetpack using terminator armoured Chaos lord.

Lord Malorne
19-03-2010, 19:46
A merc list where you can custom make any race you like with any customisable character would be great, sadly the models you would use are highly likely to not be GW, so it will not happen IMO.

lowmanjason
19-03-2010, 19:48
I assume the 'now' option should read 'no'?


Also: No.

wow, my bad! how did i miss that?

incarna
19-03-2010, 19:49
I think it's a bad idea. I think of 40k as a tabletop strategy game and I tend to think of things like War Machine, Malifoux, and the like more as tabletop skirmish game.

With that said, I think a 40k in a flash suplement that contained such a rule - as well as rules for adding customization for vehicles and squads might be a good idea.

Perhaps players build a 500 point army with all the restrictions of 40k in a flash and are given an additiona 100 points of "upgrades" to apply to HQ, squads, and vehciles.

wazatdingder
19-03-2010, 19:54
I can only imagine the WAAC stuff that would come out of this.

No, no, no

lowmanjason
19-03-2010, 19:55
It would be nice to have guidelines.

I know i could make my own but i don't think many people would like a Bike riding, jetpack using terminator armoured Chaos lord.

exactly... a rule to to keep things under control. using the same formula and critiria thet they use for points values and what can go with what... you know, that way everything is legit but i dont think needs to be tourney legal. or maybe it should. my local GW comes up with campains and gives you options other than standard to kinda customize your dudes. it loads of fun and you get that much more involved and attached to your dudes too. its fun.

War Angel
19-03-2010, 19:58
I said yes.

I think it would add some more imagination to the game.
The no answers are definatly valid reasons why not.
I just happen to not agree with the answer.

Like griffindale said doing it right is important.
I would say even more so than doing it at all.

Lots of other great ideas here.

Mannimarco
19-03-2010, 19:58
yes: provided it wasnt open to the same kind of build you could do with the old VDR

it might even make the games a little different, seeing new faces on the field instead of the same old characters time and time again (why in the hell does every chapter have a guy who is identical to vulkan?, oh theres an iyanden farseer identical to eldrad?)

to everybody who said no and called herohammer on it: and this would make it different from what we are moving towards how?

starlight
19-03-2010, 20:00
Erm....no.




They tried this before. It didn't work.




So.... No.

lowmanjason
19-03-2010, 20:05
Erm....no.




They tried this before. It didn't work.




So.... No.

please elaborate. you cant just say no it doesnt work!;)

Hunger
19-03-2010, 20:15
Why would you need this? If you want to create your own special character either:

1) Use a regular Captain/Farseer/Boss, give him an unusual weapon setup and write a paragraph of history about him. He might not be the ultimate killing machine, but he will be special to you, and you can watch his history develop as you play games.

2) Just write your own special character - same as above, but give him a unique and balanced special rule or two. Playtest with your friends, listen to their feedback and be prepared to change things if they suggest it. If you have no friends, ask someone at your store for a game a week in advance, explain to them you will be using a special character of your own creation and again, listen to their advice regarding the fairness of your character.

I voted NO because there is no need for official rules - if you want to make your own character go ahead, and if he's not overpowered then nobody should decline the offer to fight your character. If he is not overpowered by most of your opponents' reasoning and someone refuses to play against you, then you probably don't want to play that person anyway.

CrownAxe
19-03-2010, 20:18
please elaborate. you cant just say no it doesnt work!;)

What is there to elaborate on?

GW tried it before, it didn't work

Lord Cook
19-03-2010, 20:19
We are perfectly capable of doing this sort of thing ourselves. We hardly need GW to rubber stamp their approval on it. The only reason to get official approval would be GW-run tournaments, in which case getting a character creation system finely balanced enough to not simply give certain races an unfair advantage would be incredibly difficult.

ctsteel
19-03-2010, 20:24
Make an apocalypse datasheet - they made that expansion for this very sort of reason. Use the existing codex characters as a guideline for points costs, and err on the expensive side when there's a conflict of costs (in apoc a few points shouldn't matter and it's opponent-friendly).

For regular 40k games, you then use him as either that datasheet by opponent consent, or you come up with a backup version which uses a standard codex choice with 'counts as' for some bits, and ignores others if they aren't legal.

Thommy H
19-03-2010, 20:26
What's the point? Isn't a basic character with a list of options exactly what we have in every Codex already? Just having more ways to customise it wouldn't make them "special" - a special character is one which has a name and rules that can't otherwise be replicated. If you can replicate those rules then what makes them any different from a power weapon or a bike that anyone else can get?

starlight
19-03-2010, 20:27
please elaborate. you cant just say no it doesnt work!;)

Actually...


What is there to elaborate on?

GW tried it before, it didn't work

Pretty much. Whatever GW offered, gamers tried to wring every last drop of advantage out of, completely ignoring any sense of background. :(

Take a look at the direction each Codex is taking...further and further from *character creation*...because they know that handing that kind of abuseability over to their target market (teenage munchkins*) is a recipe for disaster... :(


We are perfectly capable of doing this sort of thing ourselves. We hardly need GW to rubber stamp their approval on it. The only reason to get official approval would be GW-run tournaments, in which case getting a character creation system finely balanced enough to not simply give certain races an unfair advantage would be incredibly difficult.

Exactly. Get off your butts and do it yourselves...:p...that *is* the point of having a hobby after all...so you can enjoy exercising your imagination... :shifty:













*whether you like it or not, this *is* GW's target market...kids who will drop a few hundred dollars of mommy/daddy's money before moving on to their next fad...

susu.exp
19-03-2010, 20:31
they had a chapter aproved with a guide for making your own vehicals and warmachines, what about special characters. i think it would be pretty cool and it would give a lot of momentum to people who like to do convertions. and to me, it seems it wouldnt take that long to produce a good set of rules and points values and options and wargear and what not! what do you think? :)

That would be an excellent idea if GW didnīt already do that. The unnamed HQ choices in codices are precisely that. For instance I run a special character called Baccus the afflicted, Commander of the Iron lungs IVth company, which turned traitor during the war for Remigius III. The conversion is based on a fantasy sorcerers head and the Marine Commander kit and heīs got a Lord profile, Mark of Nurgle and a Deamon weapon. Presto: Special Character. While the wargear for HQs is limited in some Codices, thereīs usually enough scope for a lot of things.

Eldoriath
19-03-2010, 20:31
Would be fun and a nice thing to have for apocalypse games, as of now you have to more or less create your own around existing and see what rules ar reasonable for those points. Completely doable, but I wouldn't mind a SCDR data-sheet.

Project2501
19-03-2010, 20:34
No, it would simply take the game from being army based to character based.

Isn't that what Inquisitor was all about?

Sorros
19-03-2010, 20:36
I would like it if it didn't turn into Herohammer. As it stands, special characters are used slot anyway, so at the very least this might allow fluff to fit in (example: eldrad in a
saim-hann army. Yriel fighting for Altansar. Etc)

also would allow for some beautiful conversion opportunities that would actually have a place in armies.


With that said, I doubt GW could make a truly balanced custom hero book.

Tenken
19-03-2010, 20:57
They already have rules to make your own special characters. It's called an HQ choice. Ooo-Ahhh.

Doppleskanger
19-03-2010, 21:00
surely some codex's allow you to do just this. For instance the wolf lord choices allow you to build 200 point plus characters with incredible war gear and special rules. The Dark angel codex...doesn't.
This is great when they get it right and terrible when they get it wrong for instance the previous armoury in the Chaos codex allowed for some truly unbalanced characters. It would be nice if forthcoming codex'e allowed really customisable characters who never became too over the top, but that balance is hard to achieve, certainly if the history of 40k is taken into account!

MadHatter
19-03-2010, 21:47
I voted yes. though I would not allow it for tournament use. However I think for a true campaign setting where players such as myself want to write thier own army fluff and create thier own history for the campaign this would be loads of fun.

And though I do not see a need for it to be done other then for those who are gonna say its not offical, I think it would be fun to see. Heck they could do this for a WD articile for thier 40k campaign supplement.

Sir_Turalyon
19-03-2010, 21:54
they had a chapter aproved with a guide for making your own vehicals and warmachines, what about special characters. i think it would be pretty cool and it would give a lot of momentum to people who like to do convertions. and to me, it seems it wouldnt take that long to produce a good set of rules and points values and options and wargear and what not! what do you think?


Why, there are rules exactly for that in each codex? In HQ section of army list, after special characters entries?

emcee temper
19-03-2010, 22:00
It would never possibly work. People would be creating special characters with unbeatable stats. e.g. 2+ save, 2+ inv, 2+ cover, 4+ feel no, etc. fearless blah blah blah. It also wouldnt be pointed corectly, i mean, if GW cant even get Malan'tai's points right, special characters???:wtf:

Bunnahabhain
20-03-2010, 02:30
I'm not voting, as my answer is sort of.

There should be rules to build your own special character, in every codex. The General character rules.

ALL special characters are a set build of the generic character, ie Calgar is just a chapter master with options number 3, 7 11, 15 and 16. If you don't fit within that framework, tough. Re-read the background, and make them fit as best you can.

There you go DIY special charcters, only now they're roughly balanced.

shin'keiro
20-03-2010, 03:06
I think White Dwarf should go back to being a hobby magazine of the 80s and 90s.. with special characters and their rules, 40k missions, Space Hulk missions, Space Hulk army rules printed in there each month, instead of being an advertising magazine which it is now

starlight
20-03-2010, 03:14
Keep dreaming... :(

ctsteel
20-03-2010, 05:10
Keep dreaming... :(

...of the WD Spearhead supplement in a few months' time? :p

lowmanjason
20-03-2010, 05:24
They already have rules to make your own special characters. It's called an HQ choice. Ooo-Ahhh.

if that truly is the case then why cant i have a 60.000.000 million year old necron lord with a weapon skill any higher that 4. i think after that much time and experience they can do a little better than that especially if a marine can do it in just a few hundred. im talking about a standard for baseline stats and everything. each race can have its own starting point. say 100 pts, then every stat point would cost X pnt depending on race, maybe wargear options that are not normally availible or special rules that wouldnt be availible (ie pariah lord, flayed lord) and point cost would increase expotentialy with the mor you add. and nobody could argue over the point cost because it all comes from the book. if marine players can create thier own chapter with its own special rules, then why cant other armies at least be able to make thier own individual? i know it can be done and i think everybodies input we could even come up with something here that we could all agree and use. remember, nobody is forcing you to use custom characters, by the way, if you are worried about over powered special character try looking at the new blood angels and thier points cost... S8 rending...
:wtf:

starlight
20-03-2010, 08:12
Because Warhammer 40,000 isn't about creating characters, it's about creating armies.


If you want games about creating characters, try out Necromunda or Inquisitor.

In battles the size of 40K, individual characters are fairly irrelevant and expecting HeroHammer is the result of either too much Hollywood, or not enough understanding of the fundamentals of the game.

NightrawenII
20-03-2010, 12:07
I'm not voting because:
- There should be some template, how to create your character for Apocalypse.
- For normal games anyone, who isn't WAAC player, could make a reasonable SC. I'm one of these examples, BTW.

Also this:
ALL special characters are a set build of the generic character, ie Calgar is just a chapter master with options number 3, 7 11, 15 and 16. If you don't fit within that framework, tough. Re-read the background, and make them fit as best you can.

htj
20-03-2010, 13:32
I'm going with No. I've never had any trouble making flavourful, fluffy, named characters for my armies using the wargear options present in the Codex. But for me the focus is the army, not just several important bods striding around among the minions.

Archangel_Ruined
20-03-2010, 14:43
I don't think it would be so bad as long as they costed things on the side of caution. Like the old VDR rules, if you really wanted something for the fluff you could have it but it was going to cost more than a codex choice. That way we wouldn't see abuse of the rules and thus it wouldn't be a problem.

Arvendragon
20-03-2010, 20:59
*whether you like it or not, this *is* GW's target market...kids who will drop a few hundred dollars of mommy/daddy's money before moving on to their next fad...

I take offense at that!

I'm sure that we can work out a pretty good one amongst ourselves...
Though I want the old Armories back. Remember the 3.5ed Chaos Space Marine dex?

Lord Damocles
20-03-2010, 21:03
Remember the 3.5ed Chaos Space Marine dex?
I still have nightmares about it.

carl
20-03-2010, 21:26
I'd say Yes and No, (so i haven't actually voted). The long and short is that whilst anyone can create their own SC, conming up with an aproximate points value is very difficult. Some set of guidlines there would be very nice. However there's no way any such set of guidleines can fully account for the effects of certian rules combinations, or unique rules. But they're still useful in letting you fine tune things.

starlight
20-03-2010, 22:02
I take offense at that!

Why on earth would you do that...? :confused:

1) it's a fact
and
2) it has nothing to do with you

...so why would a fact that has no bearing on you be offensive to you...? :eyebrows:


I'm sure that we can work out a pretty good one amongst ourselves...
Though I want the old Armories back. Remember the 3.5ed Chaos Space Marine dex?

Indeed, many of us do...and we also remember it suffered from *horrible* abuse potential...and is the main reason GW has streamlined their books...because too many people couldn't play nice and tried to milk every last drop of advantage out of that book...with zero attention to army background.

40K is about *armies*, not characters. If you want a game that is character centric, GW offers them...if you want to tweak your local group to suit your playstyle, GW encourages it...but don't try to make 40K into something that it isn't.

MadHatter
20-03-2010, 22:27
I do not see making your own SC's as anything but what GW wants out of thier product, well in the old days of sportmanship and fun. Its creative and allows for the fluff of a army to be fully come to life as they follow the hero into battle. Yarrick is a great example of this. One man steps up and leads his troops to victory when all seemed lost.

starlight
20-03-2010, 22:42
I do not see making your own SC's as anything but what GW wants out of thier product...

GW wants product to sell...nothing more, nothing less...

If they believed some form of Character Creation system would drive sales, they would already have it in place...

Thommy H
20-03-2010, 23:48
I don't really understand why people are struggling with this concept. If you create a set of rules to make "special characters" they stop being special.

Do we not remember 3rd and 4th Edition Space Marines with their Terminator Honours? This, for the uninitiated, was a wargear item which gave your character +1A. Nice idea because, in 2nd Edition, it was quite common for special characters to have an extra Attack or something. So Terminator Honours were a way of customising your Captain to be a bit more a veteran, or to better represent your Chapter Master. Except that because everyone could just take the same option, it wasn't "custom" any more - in fact, it became pretty much standard. So all those "special" characters weren't special at all: they were just another standard option.

The whole idea of a special character is that it's the only way to represent a certain legendary figure. You can't replicate Marneus Calgar's rules using the normal Chapter Master entry - he has too many weapons and he has rules there's no way to purchase independently. That's why he exists. If there was just an option for all his stuff in the normal entry, there'd be no point giving him a page to himself.

Rules to create "special characters" would be literally nothing more than more options for regular characters, no different from a power weapon or Terminator Armour.

Archangel_Ruined
21-03-2010, 00:27
True, once you'd bought a power fist not shelling out 10pts for another attack was just silly. That said, if it was 20pts for the extra attack it wouldn't be so bad. If people really want a special fluffy character then let them have some overcosted, tournament legal VDR-esque rules for them. We'll never see them used competitively that way so it wont be a repeat of the marine sized flying MC's of chaos 3.5.

Thommy H
21-03-2010, 00:30
It would still just be another option though, that's my point. You can charge 500 points for it, but if anyone can get it then it isn't "special" by the intended definition of the term "special character". It's just a regular option. The list in the character entry gets longer, nothing more.

ehlijen
21-03-2010, 00:46
The only thing that makes special characters 'special' is the fact that they have a name and you can't change their gear (much).

Both those points would be lost if you make a SC-DIY-tool. So all you're doing is to expand the already substantial character upgrade sections (yes they are substantial, just not filled with quite as much junk as the 3rd ed armouries).

Archangel_Ruined
21-03-2010, 00:57
Whether your chapter master has a combi weapon or a storm bolter and melta bombs isn't special, it's what they picked up on their way out of the door. If your chapter master is a half bionic psycho (and thus has FNP) is unique to you, all I say is that if you want that then prepare to pay slightly over the odds for it. It wouldn't even have to be in every codex, they could stick a section in the back of a game expansion, or even in the BRB come 6th (a long way off, I know, but then the VDR's were a long time ago too).

Thommy H
21-03-2010, 01:06
So suppose GW introduces a new version of bionics which gives the FNP rule: does that not then, by virtue of being an option anyone can take, just become like a storm bolter or meltabombs? What makes it different besides "they can't get it right now, in the current Codex"? If you let anyone have it, it's no longer unique and a character that has it has no claim to being "a special character" - he's no more special than Captain Marcus with his power sword and plasma pistol.

Freman Bloodglaive
21-03-2010, 01:08
I voted yes, but I have to agree that it is generally possible to represent some interesting variations using the existing rules. Admittedly playing Space Wolves I'm a little freer than most.

For example I created Santa Claws, with model (http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/index.php?showtopic=187940).

Archangel_Ruined
21-03-2010, 01:17
Because the way I've proposed it is simple, if viewed as a competitive edge the over costing would fail this straight away. If you wanted a marine captain (or farseer for that matter) with FNP, eternal warrior and MC rules then you, or anyone else, could. It would just cost so much it wouldn't be the no brainer that terminator honours were, you'd be much better off spending those points within the regular lists if you wanted the best 'bang for your buck'. With a proper set of character design rules your HQ would be massively variable, so they would be unique, just damn expensive. With the existence of apocalypse I can't see a problem with any of this, I'd pay too much for 'my' chapter master in a 4000pt game, I wouldn't in a 1500pt tournie list. You need to allow some room for the fluff, the new style of codex has stamped this out with the aim of fair play at top levels. I say again, if you're worried about abuse at tournament level then purposely overprice the options, people who play for fluffy fun wont bemoan the loss of 30pts across an army anyway.

susu.exp
21-03-2010, 01:24
Then again in friendly games itīs a matter of agreeing with your opponent anyway, so anything goes. If you want to play a Farseer with FNP, no problem. Come up with a points cost and if itīs not too unreasonable Iīd playtest it. The VDRs were rough guidelines. So would any CDR and itīd still be far more limiting than simply coming up with something homebrew.

Freman Bloodglaive
21-03-2010, 01:27
Susu, isn't that quote from Jon Stewart?

I thought Jamie Oliver was a cook.

Thommy H
21-03-2010, 01:38
so they would be unique

No they wouldn't. They be as unique as relic blades and digital weapons - which were previously limited to special characters (Azrael and Tycho, respectively) - but are now options any Space Marine Captain or Chapter Master can enjoy. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against more options or anything, I'm just saying that more options =/= special characters.

The idea of special character creation rules is philosophically unsound, because selecting from a list of options does not produce unique characters, no matter how long that list is. I'm not saying it wouldn't work, or that it'd be unbalanced: I'm saying it makes no sense. It's just more options for characters, not some magic bullet to let you make the character you've always wanted to.

Jerrus
21-03-2010, 01:45
All you reallly need is a name for your character.

Archangel_Ruined
21-03-2010, 01:48
Jon Oliver, another expat. Anyway...

If you give enough options for tailoring the stats and rules of an IC then you will end up with unique choices (I'm not talking weapons, there are enough of them in the codeces already). With all the USR's, WS, BS, S, T, W, I and A stats (maybe even LD), plus any number of funky things like riding horses/bears/wolves/sharks with frikkin' lasers - then you'll have unique characters. It's like the chance of your speccing an aston martin or similiar the same as another. On paper they only make 9 cars but they'll paint them any colour you can imagine, will trim them in any colour you ask for, have more entertainment options than you can shake a stick at and have choices for transmissions and brakes. After all those options you're likely to end up with a truely unique car, much the same as, given the variety of upgrades, you'd end up with a unique character. If you don't agree then try this:

http://cc.porsche.com/icc_euro/ui/pva/fs_global.jsp?RT=1269132400372&PARAM=parameter_internet_en&LANG=en&USER=EN&BOS=win&BV=3.6&BF=gecko&BORG=firefox

It's the porshe car speccing window (if you can find a better way to waste time my life doesn't need to hear about it). Spec a 911. Any of them. Really. Think that options don't make things unique?

Phelix
21-03-2010, 03:16
I don't like special characters in my battles as it is....

unless its a historical re-fight (like Creeds Cadian 8th vs Chaos during the 13th crusade etc) or a "what-if" scenario, but only if its really interesting.....

As is some of the rules are just plain silly (HAHA Creed! stop infiltrating legions of Baneblades!)

MadHatter
21-03-2010, 04:46
GW wants product to sell...nothing more, nothing less...

If they believed some form of Character Creation system would drive sales, they would already have it in place...

Well the full quote would have been better, after all in the old days and creative fluff was part of the game. and strongly encouraged. And having met some of the GW staff when i worked for the company not everyone who works for GW think in terms of dollors as you just said.
That being said I am not saying GW does not want to make money.

Your Own special Character is fun for campaigns and events with story lines. This does not sit with everyone who plays. Lots of people are quite happy just going to the game store and play a pick up game with a random stranger. Some would rather play a pre organized game with a theme. While there are others who only want to play Apoc.
I liked having a club campaign where our character and squads of many battles gained experience and honor.

I think this would be a good concept to add to a 40k General compedium type book. Which i think is another thread already.

ehlijen
21-03-2010, 08:41
No, Archangle Ruined, that won't lead to more unique characters. It will just lead to a certain number of favourite builds for each army (usually one per popular army build), just as it did with Chaos 3.5.

Theoretically, if every option was equally good, most them mutually exclusive and each suited any army build equally well, what you say could happen, but why go to that much effort when you can just say 'here's as many options as we could feasibly make balanced in time, go crazy modelling them because that's where the real personality is'?

carl
21-03-2010, 12:44
No, Archangle Ruined, that won't lead to more unique characters. It will just lead to a certain number of favourite builds for each army (usually one per popular army build), just as it did with Chaos 3.5.


Nope. Wrong.

It would lead to huge numbers of variation because the only [people taking it would be fluff nerds. The tourney idiots can take one but they'll find it so overcosted they'd be better with a pre-made one so it works.

Earthbeard
21-03-2010, 13:36
Nope. Wrong.

It would lead to huge numbers of variation because the only [people taking it would be fluff nerds. The tourney idiots can take one but they'll find it so overcosted they'd be better with a pre-made one so it works.

What a stunning generalist attitude you have.

Naive springs to mind.

carl
21-03-2010, 13:42
What a stunning generalist attitude you have.

Naive springs to mind.


Explain to me then this:

1. why would a tourney player take it if it's overpriced.

2. why would 2 diffrent fluff fanatics with two diffrent fluff characters take remotely the same guy/girl.

Xelloss
21-03-2010, 13:50
Template characters = good
Special characters = wrong

Thommy H
21-03-2010, 13:59
1. why would a tourney player take it if it's overpriced.

Why would they make something overpriced? The vehicle design rules didn't turn out overpriced vehicles as a feature - it was just a consequence of paying exact points for every niggling little ability, whereas in the actual army lists things are priced based on the role they play alongside other units. For example, close combat beasts are less vital in a close combat army, so cost less, but would be at a premium for the Tau or Guard.

"Special character" rules wouldn't feature things that cost more than normal ("30 points for a power weapon!") because then no one would even look twice at them and they'd be useless in games. Points values are not about ensuring balance just so we can play a competitive game - they're about making things fair. If one player had a character that was blatantly and intentionally overcosted, the idea of a point limit would be complete nonsense.

And, for the five-hundredth time, special characters aren't special if it's just more options for regular characters. What you're all asking for is not "special character creation rules" it's "expanded options for our characters". And then, years from now, when everyone's gotten used to being able to buff random stats for a fixed cost and taking Eternal Warrior and FNP at will, and the real special characters have to go that much further to differentiate themselves, you'll be asking for even more options to make your own "special characters"!

carl
21-03-2010, 14:32
You've missed the entire point then. peiple want ruls like this so they've got some guidlines when trying to work out SC's that represent "your" chapters chapter mster. They';re not meant for random tourny player 101 to come up with a 733t character to pwn the other tourney playrs with, so naturally you overprice them slightly so that they DON'T turn up EXCEPT in the situation they're designed for. Fluff representation on the tabletop.

This is a game that more than about the playing for many people, it's also about the STORY behind the game.

McLucien18
21-03-2010, 14:38
It would never possibly work. People would be creating special characters with unbeatable stats. e.g. 2+ save, 2+ inv, 2+ cover, 4+ feel no, etc. fearless blah blah blah.

In this case no opponent in their right mind would ever play against it. I'm fine with people creating their own character datasheets for apocalypse because the other person can see it and decide whether they will let it be used or not. I wouldnt be in favour of making it tourney legal or whatever, but for a friendly game, it really is whatever you want to play. Personally, because I tend to avoid big apocalypse games with people I dont know, there probably wouldn't be a problem.

A bit of variety is nice, as long as it is not ott. Besides, some of of the half-baked campaigns etc. that I have taken part in have resulted in statlines sarily similar to this. For normal games I would probably stick to the book though.

susu.exp
21-03-2010, 14:49
And I think youīre missing the point of Thommy Hs and my objection. Any character design system neccessarily is restricted and basically what you have in the HQ slots anyway. If you truly want to represent some fluff point, you can design your special character without such a restrictive system from scratch. Of course it wouldnīt bear an "official" stamp, but such a stamp is unneccessary for anything but tournament play (where a player canīt refuse to play a game, or if they do auto-lose). In normal games itīs all opponents permission anyway (including anything thatīs in the Codex. If I donīt feel like playing biker Nobs today, Iīll play your Orks only if you donīt play biker Nobs).
Giving my Lord FnP and blight grendades would certainly be interesting and with my opponents agreement I could say, heīs a Pleague Lord (I generally play him as Lord with MoN and DW) and add a few points. I could also come up with some special rules for a Character on my own. Heck, I play a homebrew Codex for my Varyngr. The way to go there is coming up with something on your own, talking to your opponent and asking for permission and then playing a few games to see if the character is OP or UP and adjusting points.

carl
21-03-2010, 14:55
And I think youīre missing the point of Thommy Hs and my objection. Any character design system neccessarily is restricted and basically what you have in the HQ slots anyway. If you truly want to represent some fluff point, you can design your special character without such a restrictive system from scratch. Of course it wouldnīt bear an "official" stamp, but such a stamp is unneccessary for anything but tournament play (where a player canīt refuse to play a game, or if they do auto-lose). In normal games itīs all opponents permission anyway (including anything thatīs in the Codex. If I donīt feel like playing biker Nobs today, Iīll play your Orks only if you donīt play biker Nobs).
Giving my Lord FnP and blight grendades would certainly be interesting and with my opponents agreement I could say, heīs a Pleague Lord (I generally play him as Lord with MoN and DW) and add a few points. I could also come up with some special rules for a Character on my own. Heck, I play a homebrew Codex for my Varyngr. The way to go there is coming up with something on your own, talking to your opponent and asking for permission and then playing a few games to see if the character is OP or UP and adjusting points.

And thats all wel and good. But how do you decide whats an appropriate points cost on top for your extra's?

All i want is a set of guiidelines for that, thats very useful to anyone though.

Archangel_Ruined
21-03-2010, 15:01
This is entirely true and I agree with every word. However, giving an official stamp to some sort of character design would sort things out a little, I've played against enough homebrewed units and IC's to know some players want the moon on a stick and want it for 5pts. If everyone is singing from the same hymn book then it ceases to be an issue. Again, I don't want any rules about the equipment for a character, just a nice WD article/PDF/section in a book on pricing USR's and stat increases. The way the codeces are going, including ever more SC's in the name of variety I can't see a problem with this. If everything is priced on the side of caution it wont be open to abuse as those points would be better spent on a warptime winged nurgle daemon prince etc. (Why would you pay equal or greater points for lord of chaos with eternal warrior added as your fluffy leader if your main objective is ranking points?). I don't think it's something the game needs I just think it would be nice to get back to the fluffier variety of 2nd, although costed to avoid the inevitable herohammer combos.

panshandle
21-03-2010, 15:49
I think White Dwarf should go back to being a hobby magazine of the 80s and 90s.. with special characters and their rules, 40k missions, Space Hulk missions, Space Hulk army rules printed in there each month, instead of being an advertising magazine which it is now

I would buy it then and actually read it!

On topic, correct me if I am wrong (I am too lazy to did them out and check) but didn't the old "Lost and the Damned" and "Slaves to Darkness" have character creation charts in? I clearly remember a chart for randomly creating demonic names but can't remember if there was anything about stat lines etc.

susu.exp
21-03-2010, 16:12
This is entirely true and I agree with every word. However, giving an official stamp to some sort of character design would sort things out a little, I've played against enough homebrewed units and IC's to know some players want the moon on a stick and want it for 5pts.

In that case just donīt play them or tell them that the ability is underpriced. I think any set of rules one could come up with would suffer from balance issues, a set of traits that work out fine at a certain point cost for CSM wonīt work at that point cost for Tau. Battletech has a design system thatīs rather reasonable, still Mechs with very different power levels end up costing the same, not to mention that there are things that you canīt adequately cover (in larger games of BT energy weapons get better compared to balistic ones, because these games go on for more turns and ammunition shortage becaomes and issue, in a duell between two lances missile mechs carry the day, in a duell between two regiments itīs lasers).


If everyone is singing from the same hymn book then it ceases to be an issue. Again, I don't want any rules about the equipment for a character, just a nice WD article/PDF/section in a book on pricing USR's and stat increases.

But again, I donīt think you can have a universal system there. In particular costs have to depend on combinations - FNP is better the higher the toughness characteristic is, EW is better the more wounds the character has, etc. I would like to see an article with a few homebrew characters from the studio, just conversions, background and what they came up with. But a design system will never get it right.


And thats all wel and good. But how do you decide whats an appropriate points cost on top for your extra's?

You make an educated guess and then playtest it. If you have trouble estimating, think about other characters and how they are costed. Start a thread in rules dev (it might be a good idea to have a single big one for all homebrew characters) and get comments on it.

shelfunit.
21-03-2010, 16:19
The trouble with GW points values is that they are completely random. The models are costed against relative costs in their own books and then a slight glance is taken at a few other army books to make sure they don't completely go OTT. There is no "X" characteristic = "Y" points formula and (for example in fantasy) an item that can be given to any character for Y points give +1 Str for a flat cost regardless of whether that makes a weak character average or a strong character grossly over powered.

susu.exp
21-03-2010, 16:22
The trouble with GW points values is that they are completely random.

Define random.


The models are costed against relative costs in their own books and then a slight glance is taken at a few other army books to make sure they don't completely go OTT.

The army is playtested against other armies. If a unit is too powerful for itīs points, itīs costed up. Done often enough this ensures that the codex is balanced in itself and against other books. Units arenīt balanced against units across books though - as noted above, this doesnīt really work.

shelfunit.
21-03-2010, 16:41
Define random.

Made up



The army is playtested against other armies. If a unit is too powerful for itīs points, itīs costed up. Done often enough this ensures that the codex is balanced in itself and against other books. Units arenīt balanced against units across books though - as noted above, this doesnīt really work.

Meh - for 40k maybe (yes I know this is a 40k thread...)
Bah - I am just venting to a forum who's game of choice is more balanced than mine.

Thommy H
21-03-2010, 16:46
This is a game that more than about the playing for many people, it's also about the STORY behind the game.

I very much promise you that this comment is hugely misdirected in my case. I wrote two pages of fluff for a 50 point unit of Chaos Warhounds once.

If you want to make your own special character, just make one and get your opponent's permission to use it. Any "guidance" would just be a more expansive list of options, and then we'd be exactly where we are now.

I don't know any more ways to explain this. Special characters are special because they have stuff other characters can't get. If you allowed other character to get [insert ability], they wouldn't be "special" - it would just be a new option. S6 power weapons used to be something only one special character had, but now loads of Space Marines have access to them. Does that make Vanguard Sergeants "special characters" now? No, it's just more options.

There's nothing wrong with having those options, it's just that it doesn't translate to being a way to create special characters. If it was advertised as such, it would make no sense.

shelfunit.
21-03-2010, 16:49
I very much promise you that this comment is hugely misdirected in my case. I wrote two pages of fluff for a 50 point unit of Chaos Warhounds once.


I really hope they didn't get killed on the first turn :D

Marshal Sinclair
21-03-2010, 17:10
Rules are already there. Take the characters from the Codex, give him a name and wargear you like, and you have your very own special character.

Thommy H
21-03-2010, 17:31
I really hope they didn't get killed on the first turn :D

Pretty much, actually.

Grand Master Raziel
21-03-2010, 18:10
I'm not voting, as my answer is sort of.

There should be rules to build your own special character, in every codex. The General character rules.

ALL special characters are a set build of the generic character, ie Calgar is just a chapter master with options number 3, 7 11, 15 and 16. If you don't fit within that framework, tough. Re-read the background, and make them fit as best you can.

There you go DIY special charcters, only now they're roughly balanced.



Though I want the old Armories back. Remember the 3.5ed Chaos Space Marine dex?

I do, but not with any kind of fondness. I actually consider that as the prime example of why the OP's idea is a bad one. Those rules were essentially what the OP is talking about, but they allowed players to crank out some horrible monstrosities that could make a real swinging effort of taking on whole armies by themselves. I don't want to have to face individual SCs that can wipe out my whole army singlehandedly, and I don't want to have to field a similar SC to defend against it happening to me.

The real problem with a system like that is not so much the pricing of individual options in isolation. It should actually be fairly easy to come up with appropriate prices for, say, getting to ignore armor saves, or getting +1 to a stat, or whatever. The real problem comes with figuring out how to price options that synergize well with each other. For instance, you could fairly easily come up with a fair price for an extra wound on a character. However, the extra wound is worth considerably more if it's combined with Eternal Warrior than it is by itself. So, do you price the wound without consideration of other factors, or do you price the wound appropriate to having it with EW? In the one case, you wind up with the extra wound being underpriced if EW is taken as well, in the other case the extra wound is overpriced if EW isn't taken. Either case is going to be unfair to somebody. That's just one example with two options. Throw enough options in to actually do what the OP is suggesting, and it's going to be a disaster.

Don't get me wrong, I do understand where the OP is coming from. Ever since at least 3rd edition, GW's special characters have had abilities that were not available to generic ICs, and that tends to get my nose bent out of joint a little. It'd be like playing D&D (3.5, that is) where the GM restricts you to only core classes, but has his NPCs running around with prestige classes. Why should the developer's characters be cooler than mine? I don't give two hoots if Marneus Calgar is Graham McNeil's favorite character. Raziel, Master of the Night Angels' 1rst Company is my favorite character. I want him to be cooler than that chucklehead Calgar. So, I agree with Bunnahabhain: "special characters" should not have any options that aren't available to generic build characters. They should just have fluffy options from a general list.

That said, if you're not looking for a system to use in tournaments, then having such a system shouldn't matter. You can either homebrew, or you can take an existing special character, make a conversion, and go the old "Counts As" route. Check out my avatar for an example of that. Raphael, Master of the Night Angels' 2nd Company rides a jetbike that's completely different in form from Sammael's. It functions on the principles of vectored thrust and lift rather than antigrav technology, so it's based on tech the Imperium still understands and can easily replicate. The Adeptus Mechanicus suspects the Night Angels of being guilty of the heresy of innovation, but at the same time are eager to examine the supposed STC template the Night Angels found with the design for Raphael's jetbike so they can start producing them for other Imperial fighting forces. That's all fluff I came up with for myself, and I made a conversion to go with it that's a WYSIWYG Imperial jetbike with TL-stormbolters and an underslung plasma cannon. Rules-wise, it's Sammael, but as far as I'm concerned, Raphael is MY character, because I came up with the background and the model.



It's the porshe car speccing window (if you can find a better way to waste time my life doesn't need to hear about it). Spec a 911. Any of them. Really. Think that options don't make things unique?

I think you're missing a vital point here. When you're pimping out your ride, there's a lot of considerations in play beyond pure performace: comfort, convenience, amenities, appearance, how well it gets you the chicks, etc. If you narrow it down to strictly performance, then the likely variety of builds is going to narrow sharply, and if you further narrow down the criteria to performance in a specific kind of environment (say, flat-out speed, or ability to handle a curvy road), then you're likely to have only one or two optimal sets of options.

In 40K, there is at the very least a very strong incentive to build to a very specific kind of performance, so even if you have a gagillion options for your IC, there's going to be a fairly small set of them (or a couple competing sets) that stands out from all the other possible builds, and you're going to see that build (or those few builds) ad nauseum. Some people are going to go with that/those build(s) because they're WAAC players, and others will go with the same build(s) so they can compete with the WAAC players if they should encounter them in open gaming. So, in the setting of Warhammer 40K, the idea that more options=more diversity is, at best, a flawed hypothesis. At worst, it's a notion that's been completely discredited by past dexes (Chaos 3.5 in particular).



This is a game that more than about the playing for many people, it's also about the STORY behind the game.

If you're more concerned with the story than the game, then a particular set of rules shouldn't matter so much. You should be able to make do with what's available, one way or another. Remember, though, in any game, you've got two competing stories going on. Maybe your HQ choice is the big hero in the narrative going on in your head, but your opponent's HQ is the hero in the narrative going on in his head. So, what seems like a great story to you might not be so satisfying to your opponent, and vice versa.


And thats all wel and good. But how do you decide whats an appropriate points cost on top for your extra's?

Well, for starters, you can look at older dexes that might have the options you're looking for. For instance, the previous Codex: Space Marine priced the Adamantine Mantle in the vicinity of 30pts. So, if you wanted to give Eternal Warrior to a SM character, that would be a pretty good basis for how much it would cost. Also, you could reverse-engineer special characters that have abilities you want to make a guess as to how much the developers thought that ability should be worth. Build a generic character with as many of the same options as the "target" special character, then subtract the generic character's price from the special characters. What you've got left is what the developers thought a reasonable cost for the abilities that the special character has that a generic character can't get.

MadHatter
21-03-2010, 20:33
ok I would be willing to settle for more options then to make characters in each of the codex's better. So that they have more of a unique feel to them. Call it what you want Rules to make your Own special character or more options.

Yes the chaos character creation rule was abused alot, i found it made for easier victory if you concentrated on the troops and other and stayed away from the lord. Or you baited the lord in. Yea he sometimes got out of hand but generally he costed the chaos player dearly when it came to the rest of his army. Which should be a lesson learned for any general. yea one or two little add ons and its still fun. maxed out makes it so its not.

And yea WD should have articles in the hobby magazine to make it worth it and things like this would be a great place for it.

lowmanjason
21-03-2010, 21:23
And yea WD should have articles in the hobby magazine to make it worth it and things like this would be a great place for it.

yeah thats what im saying chapter approved was like a compilation of a bnch of white dwarf articals i guess, making it an official "unofficial" rules set, and that is what i am thinking about and proposing.

MadHatter
21-03-2010, 21:31
yeah thats what im saying chapter approved was like a compilation of a bnch of white dwarf articals i guess, making it an official "unofficial" rules set, and that is what i am thinking about and proposing.

I am with you on this one. I loved chapter approved.

RedSarge
21-03-2010, 22:18
Space Marine Captain with boltgun, and that's it!

Not possible in current bling-dex. :p

Thommy H
21-03-2010, 22:24
Since a chainsword is completely useless without another close combat weapon or pistol to back it up, replacing his bolt pistol with a boltgun produces exactly the effect of having a Captain with just a boltgun.

Repentant Son
22-03-2010, 02:47
I think GW should publish one -- but it should be made by part of the Warseer inquisition or the Moderati from the B and C. In other words, people who have been playing the game long enough to do such a thing and keep it balanced, whilst still being able to listen to the online community about their various decisions (IE, they shouldn't take wargear/ special rule x because it is useless/overpowered).

Just a thought, Repentant Son

SanguinaryDan
22-03-2010, 03:11
No thank you.

RedSarge
22-03-2010, 16:52
Since a chainsword is completely useless without another close combat weapon or pistol to back it up, replacing his bolt pistol with a boltgun produces exactly the effect of having a Captain with just a boltgun.

But he still has a Iron Halo, and a Chainsword stuck somewhere. :D

Armory > No Armory.

Nope, i'll stick to being 1 edition behind.

lowmanjason
22-03-2010, 19:17
I think GW should publish one -- but it should be made by part of the Warseer inquisition or the Moderati from the B and C. In other words, people who have been playing the game long enough to do such a thing and keep it balanced, whilst still being able to listen to the online community about their various decisions (IE, they shouldn't take wargear/ special rule x because it is useless/overpowered).

Just a thought, Repentant Son

i think its reasonable to take a comprehensive list of wargear and special rules and say this cant be used with that. it shouldnt be that hard. you can even incorperate the the custom space marine chapter rule were you have your pros and cons to each special rule. only one custom character per army, maybe takes up 2 FO slots ( i say 1 HQ and 1 elite) it can work, be playable, fair and fun both playwise and from the modeling side. and if you dont want to use them... dont!;)

kane40k
22-03-2010, 21:23
Ever heard of Apocalypse?

our club at the moment is playing an adapted version of morheim for 4ok (we changed some rules and made it fit for what we wanted to do... thats why we didnt use necromunda) and basicly we are building up some (sweeet) characters ive just advanced a champion to a chaos lord... another few games he will have enough expirience for some skills and stats :)

Repentant Son
22-03-2010, 22:07
No thank you.

Please, elaborate. I don't know if you are talking to me or the OP.

SandQueen
23-03-2010, 00:00
I think it would be cool to have some additional options outside of Wargear. I think my Autarch is plenty cool but he still has the exact same profile as every tom, dick, and harry that plays Eldar. Maybe it would be cool to be able to pay for an initiative bump or even an extra point of toughness just to make the character a little more unique.

shin'keiro
23-03-2010, 01:18
Should GW produce a "Chapter Approved" type Special Character Creation rules?

Absolutely not! It would be open to all sorts of abuse:rolleyes:

ehlijen
23-03-2010, 01:48
I think it would be cool to have some additional options outside of Wargear. I think my Autarch is plenty cool but he still has the exact same profile as every tom, dick, and harry that plays Eldar. Maybe it would be cool to be able to pay for an initiative bump or even an extra point of toughness just to make the character a little more unique.

The autarch actually has some of the best examples of how character creation rules should be:

You can have extra strenght...or you can ignore saves. Both are good, but you can't just pump the points to get both anyway (thus removing the choice).
You can have super initiative...or you can have an extra attack!

The key to making characters unique is not giving more options, it's giving more limitations. If people actually have to choose between different boosts that are equal in power and similar in application, than we'll see diversity in characters. Simply adding an extra page of either sub par or no brainer options isn't going to do the trick.

SandQueen
23-03-2010, 02:45
The autarch actually has some of the best examples of how character creation rules should be:

You can have extra strenght...or you can ignore saves. Both are good, but you can't just pump the points to get both anyway (thus removing the choice).
You can have super initiative...or you can have an extra attack!

The key to making characters unique is not giving more options, it's giving more limitations. If people actually have to choose between different boosts that are equal in power and similar in application, than we'll see diversity in characters. Simply adding an extra page of either sub par or no brainer options isn't going to do the trick.

Yes, Autarchs do have more diversity than some other army leaders. They were just the first thing that came to mind though because I play them

lowmanjason
23-03-2010, 16:27
see i play necrons (yeah yeah, boring race... whatever. necrons are cool!) but in the 10s of millions of years of thier existence they could come up with more than the 10 wargear options that:

1- only the lord gets (other than disruption fields)
2- when compared to some other armies, are totaly LAME ei. solar pulse, chromonotron, disruption field

who ever is able to win cc enough to want or need the chromonotron?

SanguinaryDan
23-03-2010, 18:04
Please, elaborate. I don't know if you are talking to me or the OP.

So sorry. Yes, I was talking to the OP. No good can ever come of a DIY super character creation rule. There will be a couple of way over the top options mixes that probably weren't intended by the authors. It won't take long for people to find a way to mix the army wide buffs of a Vulkan with the personal ass whooping power of a Mephiston. And if they can't make it happen in a single HQ slot they'll find a way to do it with two ICs in the same army.

lowmanjason
23-03-2010, 18:29
if GW can do why cant we? isnt there any other non-marine player sick and tired of every time a new marine codex comes out (wich seems way to often), there are 2 or 3 SPs in that codex that kick your entire armys ass? come on GW, spread the luv... lol

starlight
23-03-2010, 19:12
see i play necrons (yeah yeah, boring race... whatever. necrons are cool!) but in the 10s of millions of years of thier existence they could come up with more than the 10 wargear options that:

1- only the lord gets (other than disruption fields)
2- when compared to some other armies, are totaly LAME ei. solar pulse, chromonotron, disruption field

who ever is able to win cc enough to want or need the chromonotron?

Necrons are simple by design...anything manufactured goes for economies of scale...especially when they are self repairing. Whoever created them wasn't looking to personalise the Necron *Lords*, they were looking for implacable, relentless killing machines...which they got.

A big fundamental part of Necrons is that they *aren't* personaliasable...

And bear in mind that many of the books were written for earlier editions where the rules worked differently... :shifty:

Hertic Bane
24-03-2010, 21:53
me and my mates have done this kind of thing and as long as you keep it reasonable and play test them you can make nice working charecters who dont dominate the battlefield

Archangel_Ruined
24-03-2010, 22:08
I do agree with this, it isn't that hard to come up with appropriate points costs for SC's, especially if you look at other codeces for guidelines. However, I think it might be nice for GW to come out with some simple rules so you can use you funktastic generals anywhere and any time. It isn't the end of the world if they don't, it isn't needed after all, it would just be nice.

lowmanjason
25-03-2010, 01:02
I do agree with this, it isn't that hard to come up with appropriate points costs for SC's, especially if you look at other codeces for guidelines. However, I think it might be nice for GW to come out with some simple rules so you can use you funktastic generals anywhere and any time. It isn't the end of the world if they don't, it isn't needed after all, it would just be nice.

exactly:D:D:D

lowmanjason
06-04-2010, 18:58
For anyone who wants to help contribute to the Special Character Creation rules please see this post

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=253042

your support is appreciated!:D

gwarsh41
06-04-2010, 21:01
My army has them, my space wolf one is called a wolf lord. I can put just about anything I want on him, including custom back story!

DeadlySquirrel
06-04-2010, 21:04
aslong as they didnt make your special character a win button...