Review - White Dwarf 276
P Bowles
after a series of threads that promised to make November the new September,
wicca nonsense and so forth. If I want to waste my time reading uninformative
fantasy drivel, I'll buy...but you've already guessed where this is going,
haven't you?
NEW RELEASES PRICE (£)
WARHAMMER 40,000
Chaos Daemon Prince £18
Chaos Havoc with heavy bolter £5
Chaos Havoc with missile launcher £5
Well, this is a pretty poor showing - with the Defiler, Chaos Predator, Death
Guard and who knows, maybe new Sorcerer models to go you'd have thought
something more could have been done. The models themselves are all very good,
which is a nice change for the 40k Chaos range, but still.
THE LORD OF THE RINGS
Warg Attack Boxed Set (5 models) £20
Gandalf on Shadowfax £6
The Two Towers - Saruman £5
Warg Rider £5
These are all nice figures, though Saruman looks largely indistinguishable from
his Fellowship models and Sharku's Warg has a strange expression and one of the
others seems to be frozen while trying to raise itself for a hand stand. The
boxed set contains mounted Theoden (the best of this month's releases), mounted
Aragorn, Sharku, a bow-armed Warg Rider and a spear-armed Warg Rider (funny, I
don't recall Aragorn and Theoden fighting together against Warg Riders in the
book).
EDITORIAL
Yes, I'll give this an honourable mention because some of Sawyer's comments
show that he deserves to be humiliated in public:
"[Games Day] is a superb advertisement for the best of the hobby..."
...which is just as well, as White Dwarf is a lousy advertisement for the rest
of the hobby.
"...so many gamers ... take so much pleasure out of White Dwarf..."
I know you have to write these editorials months in advance, but you're 234
days late for April 1. Still, the belated attempt at humour is appreciated.
"It's always great to spend time chatting with readers, finding out what they
like the most or which parts of the magazine they think could be improved."
The price, for starters - £3.50 and you only get 120 sheets of toilet paper.
"...whilst most of the comments are very similar..."
Take away Gav's keyboard and give him a banana instead.
"...there are always the odd gems that give me a new perspective on a specific
area."
This bit's crap.
Oh, yes, so it is.
"In fact, one of the biggest cheers of the weekend went up when I announced
White Dwarf would be giving a regular slot to the Fanatic team to give quality
coverage of Specialist Games."
And soon after that, we'll give the design teams regular slots to give quality
coverage to Warhammer and 40k. Promise.
NEWS
Warhammer Ancient Battles? In White Dwarf? Seriously? No, I don't believe it...
Shieldwall, we are told, contains historical background ("the Vikings
worshipped the great gods Khorne, Slaanesh, Nurgle and Tzeentch and rode War
Mammoths to battle in their raids on the Old Wo...uh, Western Europe") as well
as 28 regional army list (Hordes of Denmark, Beasts of Sweden...).
Not much else of note - those who thought Tau figures were bad haven't seen the
still for the Playstation game Fire Warrior, a second Liber Chaotica book is
due (hadn't realised the first was out yet) and the Tomb Kings are due next
month (big surprise - and why isn't their army deal listed here?) The observant
among you may note that the preview on GW's website had the header 'New:
Warhammer Armies Tomb Kings!' This has been replaced in the final issue by 'Two
Battle Reports this Issue!' - I'd like to see GW try to claim they had always
planned the TK for next month rather than this, especially as they couldn't be
bothered to change the cover art.
INDEX ASTARTES FIRST FOUNDING - CLAWS OF THE RAVEN
Claws of the Raven, eh? Imaginative title - when you consider that the
alternative was probably 'Guard of the Raven'. While other Primarchs have
sought perfection, learning or justice, or have become embittered by perceived
wrongs, there is nothing sympathetic about Corax. We are given no details of
his personality or beliefs, but are told simply that he was brought up to
believe his destiny was to free some slaves, and he used the most ruthless and
bloodthirsty methods to ensure that he was achieved, even at the cost of
inciting civil war and disorder. Later, he subjected his own people to genetic
experiements that would make Fabius Bile blanch, and the retrofitting of a
desire to bring peace to the society he had thrown into anarchy and a search
for redemption are very unconvincing. Predictably, he does indeed quoth
"Nevermore", but I'm disappointed it isn't the Raven Guard battlecry...
Of the Legion itself, likewise we are told little. The sections on its
organisation and beliefs are particularly brief, and we are given no
information on Raven Guard actions except Istvaan V. It's hard to see what, in
fact, this piece does tell us - it repeats several times that the RG like
hitting the enemy at his weak points (now, there's an innovative idea), but
that's about it. This is not among the better IA pieces. There is also a fluff
inconsistency within the piece, as we are told that the slaves worshipped the
Emperor even before Corax was found but that no one later had any idea who the
Emperor was (as usual), and a couple of irritating typos - is the Captain
profiled head of the 5th Company or the 2nd?
The army list itself is condensed, taking a half-page format similar to the CSM
lists, and adding a series of special rules. Raven Guard can not only always
choose to use drop pods in deep strike missions, they can reroll the scatter.
The only drawback associated with this and a few other upgrades, most notably a
command squad with jump pack and lightning claw options for its members, is the
proviso that RG can only have as many HS choices as FA in their army.
LURE OF THE GODS
"Following the increased workload on the magazine last month..."
We had to put something in with actual content. It really strained our
abilities, I can tell you. Gav almost had an anurism.
"Happily, this is no longer the case..."
...As you can see from this issue, no work at all has gone into its
preparation. We didn't even bother with simple things like proofreading or
selecting an appropriate cover.
Sawyer's army vs. 20 Dark Riders led by two characters (seriously, that's the
whole 1000pt army). Sawyer says that "I won't go into the details of this
battle mainly because it wasn't a battle as such." Instead, it was what is
often referred to as a 'massacre'. Odd that Sawyer had no qualms about waxing
lyrical for two pages over his victory last month...
Sawyer decides to "seek solace in the fact that I'm highly unlikely to face an
army like this again".
Because he'll fire the next person to try it.
Next, he faces a 1250pt Goblin army with, wait for it, 61 Goblins. Including
characters, herders, Fanatics and Squig Hoppers. With no Wolf Riders and no
missile troops. With a Giant and 3 Trolls, in a game barely higher than
1000pts. And even then the Chaos army failed to do any damage, if only because
the Fanatics wiped out the Gobbos before they could.
After this battle Sawyer decides to dismount his general from his pointless
Chariot. Nice to see that even with limited amounts of cash he can still waste
a lot of it. And to cap it all Sawyer's latest excuse for not buying any
Marauders or even Warriors is that he wants 5 Screamers.
PATH TO GLORY
Chaos Warbands part II. The Power-specific Favour bonuses are a nice touch
(gain 2 favour points for taking a Champion of the opposing Power out of
action, for instance), though they seemed a bit lost on what else would be
characterful for Nurgle. The mutations (6 in all) are disappointingly bland and
necessarily lack variety, although as a whole these rules add to the last
issue's basic warband rules. Campaign play is handled in a very low-detail way,
and I'd recommend using the Mordheim D66 damage table rather than 'D6 - on a 1
you're dead, otherwise you're fine' presented here. Also, being able to spend
favour to ignore 1s makes it all but impossible even for henchmen to die; this
ability should be reserved for the Champion only to make him a bit more
special. Finally, there are no rules here for gaining extra equipment after
battle except where rolled as favours.
WARHAMMER 40,000: LURKING EVIL
Battle report - DA vs. Necrons. Bleh. Armageddon should have nothing to do with
Necrons; nor, of course, should the 40k universe as a whole.
Curious fact - here we are told that a Necron structure has been on Armageddon
'for over six hundred millennia'. Seems the chimps really have confused
'millennia' with 'million', either here or in the original background.
CHAPTER APPROVED
Necron and Tau Q&A. We learn that a Monolith can move and fire with its
ordnance weapon. *sigh*
LORDS OF NEHEKHARA: TOMB KINGS PREVIEW
Shown are models we've all seen and, more interestingly, some of the book's
art, which is brilliant. The cover picture is nice enough, but I can say,
having browsed through the book, that there is a particular treat in the form
of a full-colour chariot scene (the box art, maybe?). That's not shown here,
but the art shown is all good (the mummies - maybe Ushabti? - in particular).
Space McQuirk 'treats' us to a short story relating to the Tomb Kings. It
features a pyramid - disappointing in a way, since the TK background otherwise
does a good job of steering away from the pointy stereotype and tries for a
more 'New Kingdom' feel. This story is all the more irritating because you can
sense the imagery McQuirk is trying to create, but with his poor storytelling
skills you can't quite picture it as vividly as you should be able to.
LESS TALK, MORE ACTION!
Another 'let's show off some of Fanatic's latest models and pretend we're
supporting Specialist Games' piece. The new BFG Imperial ships look great, and
the Inquisitor Kroot seems fine if apparently less detailed than the otherwise
identical 40k-scale ones, and horribly painted. The Warmaster Winged Nightmare
is innovative and very well-posed in a brooding, almost gargoyle-like stance.
The Black Coach itself looks nice, but the horses pulling it completely ruin
the overall effect.
THE COMING OF THE BEAST
DE, Eldar and Tyranid BFG battle report.
'EAVY METAL MASTERCLASS
The Daemon Prince, and the conversion of an Iron Warriors Daemon Prince (a very
nice figure, though no parts for Legion-specific variants appear to be included
in the Daemon Prince set).
THE HISTORY OF THE DAMNED
Now this is unexpected, and certainly welcome - a racial chronology of the
Undead (yes, you heard - not the Tomb Kings or the Vampire Counts, the
*Undead*, as a whole). A useful resource for whoever was asking about the Tomb
Kings backstory, a nice piece of nostalgia for those of us familiar with the
4th Ed. Undead, and more generally just an interesting and well-presented fluff
piece of the sort all too rare in White Dwarf. This includes gems I'd forgotten
such as the Dark Elves from whom Nagash learned Dark Magic in the days before
he created necromancy. It includes a new entry after the Battle at La
Maisontaal (with which the original timeline ended) which explains that Settra
has embarked upon an attempt to recreate the glories of his lifetime with a new
age of conquest - which satisfactorily explains why the Tomb Kings will come
into conflict with most other races without reducing them to the shallow 'we
hate all flessshy thingsss' stereotype I'd feared in light of the Necrubbish.
HEROES & VILLAINS OF THE 41st MILLENNIUM: AHRIMAN OF THE THOUSAND SONS
A new fluff series covering special characters' backstories in detail (and it
is detailed - we have four pages devoted to Ahriman, though one's a story
piece).
'EAVY METAL MASTERCLASS
Tau Devilfish - a bit behind the times, aren't we?
DEFEND TO THE LAST
An interesting battle report, perhaps - HE vs. Goblins. Also interestingly,
this is a weighted battle unlike most WD reports - 2,000pts of Gobbos vs. 1,000
of High Elves. Although Warhammer makes plenty of provision for unequal forces
in its scenarios (this is Rearguard), these are rarely the ones WD focuses on.
The Goblins' paintscheme is worth an honourable mention, harking back to the
darker colours favoured in the pages of the magazine in the 3rd Edition era
(except for the white of the Night Gobbos' clothes, but it works), and very
well executed at that.
The High Elf player made an obvious mistake in army selection by sinking points
into two Chariots - against large Gobbo units these just asked to be bogged
down. Eagles were a better choice but taking four expensive single models in
addition to the characters was unwise given the points constraints. By contrast
the Gobbo army was very efficiently-designed for what it needed to achieve,
being packed to the brim with Wolf Riders and Wolf Chariots.
The resulting combat looked surprisingly close on these facts, but predictably
the Elven attack stalled while there were still piles of Goblins remaining and
the result was probably inevitable.
THE LORD OF THE RINGS
THE RINGBEARER SPEAKS
An Alessio editorial for this section of the magazine. They are already
planning an LotR supplement based on Balin's expedition into Moria (ie, an
excuse to produce some Dwarf models).
HELM'S DEEP
Model showcase.
PAINTING WORKSHOP
More useful than many of these articles, this visits basic painting techniques,
including layering, painting armour, faces and hair. Not that the results will
inspire many people to copy them.
PAINTING MASTERCLASS
Warg Riders.
FIGHT AT AMON HEN
Diorama designed to show that, no, the Jungle Trees *aren't* the least
convincing trees ever created for a miniatures game.
MODELLING WORKSHOP
How to make a model into a standard bearer - first, make a standard. Second,
attach it to the model. Really, that's what this article is.
PAINTING WORKSHOP
Painting Riders of Rohan - the basics. Like the articles on Elves and Goblins
with the release of the Fellowship game, this is an indepth piece which
produces respectable results. It also shows new angles of the models,
displaying the bow and quiver strapped to the Rider's back.
Philip Bowles
incrdbil
>WARHAMMER 40,000
>
>Chaos Daemon Prince £18
>Chaos Havoc with heavy bolter £5
>Chaos Havoc with missile launcher £5
>
>Well, this is a pretty poor showing - with the Defiler, Chaos Predator, Death
>Guard and who knows, maybe new Sorcerer models to go you'd have thought
>something more could have been done.
Your average monkey would have realized the Defiler would have been in
immediate demand. Perhaps they just wanted to see how many suckers
would buy the overpriced conversion kits.
>
>EDITORIAL
>
>Yes, I'll give this an honourable mention because some of Sawyer's comments
>show that he deserves to be humiliated in public:
>
>"It's always great to spend time chatting with readers, finding out what they
>like the most or which parts of the magazine they think could be improved."
>
>The price, for starters - £3.50 and you only get 120 sheets of toilet paper.
Other than price, content, quality of layout, editing and value there
is nothign wrong with WD.
>
>
>INDEX ASTARTES FIRST FOUNDING - CLAWS OF THE RAVEN
>
>
>The army list itself is condensed, taking a half-page format similar to the CSM
>lists, and adding a series of special rules. Raven Guard can not only always
>choose to use drop pods in deep strike missions, they can reroll the scatter.
>The only drawback associated with this and a few other upgrades, most notably a
>command squad with jump pack and lightning claw options for its members, is the
>proviso that RG can only have as many HS choices as FA in their army.
that's a drawback? Wow. 2 Speeder selections, two heavy. So much for
the drawback.
Perhaps more than 15 minutes needs to go into the creation of these
lists.
>
>LURE OF THE GODS
>
>"Following the increased workload on the magazine last month..."
>
>We had to put something in with actual content. It really strained our
>abilities, I can tell you. Gav almost had an anurism.
almost? Damn, so close, yet so far.
>
>Sawyer's army vs. 20 Dark Riders led by two characters (seriously, that's the
>whole 1000pt army). Sawyer says that "I won't go into the details of this
>battle mainly because it wasn't a battle as such." Instead, it was what is
>often referred to as a 'massacre'. Odd that Sawyer had no qualms about waxing
>lyrical for two pages over his victory last month...
This is the same twiot quoted by the fanboys of the former IG com list
how Sawyer hates those who only play to win, and doesn't see why
winning is important--then doubted thgat he had ever doen somethign so
cheesy like force soemone to play a second game in a one round
elimination campaign scenario, and advanace when he won the second
game. but he can't seem to muster the efforthere to get excited.
>
>DEFEND TO THE LAST
>The resulting combat looked surprisingly close on these facts, but predictably
>the Elven attack stalled while there were still piles of Goblins remaining and
>the result was probably inevitable.
And thast's the best battle rep result they could get to publish.
Imagine the other games.
Insane Ranter
"incrdbil" <incr...@flinthills.com> wrote in message
news:3ddd8dba...@usenet.flinthills.com...
> On 21 Nov 2002 16:27:17 GMT, pbo...@aol.com (P Bowles) wrote:
>
>
> >WARHAMMER 40,000
> >
> >Chaos Daemon Prince £18
> >Chaos Havoc with heavy bolter £5
> >Chaos Havoc with missile launcher £5
> >
> >Well, this is a pretty poor showing - with the Defiler, Chaos Predator,
Death
> >Guard and who knows, maybe new Sorcerer models to go you'd have thought
> >something more could have been done.
>
> Your average monkey would have realized the Defiler would have been in
> immediate demand.
Come on don't give Mike Hunt that much credit
the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King
> Well, the newsgroup seems to be settling down to a semblance of topicality
> after a series of threads that promised to make November the new September,
> wicca nonsense and so forth. If I want to waste my time reading uninformative
> fantasy drivel, I'll buy...but you've already guessed where this is going,
> haven't you?
>
> NEW RELEASES PRICE (£)
>
> WARHAMMER 40,000
>
> Chaos Daemon Prince £18
> Chaos Havoc with heavy bolter £5
> Chaos Havoc with missile launcher £5
>
> Well, this is a pretty poor showing - with the Defiler, Chaos Predator, Death
> Guard and who knows, maybe new Sorcerer models to go you'd have thought
> something more could have been done. The models themselves are all very good,
> which is a nice change for the 40k Chaos range, but still.
>
> THE LORD OF THE RINGS
>
> Warg Attack Boxed Set (5 models) £20
> Gandalf on Shadowfax £6
> The Two Towers - Saruman £5
> Warg Rider £5
>
> These are all nice figures, though Saruman looks largely indistinguishable from
> his Fellowship models and Sharku's Warg has a strange expression and one of the
> others seems to be frozen while trying to raise itself for a hand stand. The
> boxed set contains mounted Theoden (the best of this month's releases), mounted
> Aragorn, Sharku, a bow-armed Warg Rider and a spear-armed Warg Rider (funny, I
> don't recall Aragorn and Theoden fighting together against Warg Riders in the
> book).
>
bleh
> EDITORIAL
>
> Yes, I'll give this an honourable mention because some of Sawyer's comments
> show that he deserves to be humiliated in public:
>
> "[Games Day] is a superb advertisement for the best of the hobby..."
>
> ...which is just as well, as White Dwarf is a lousy advertisement for the rest
> of the hobby.
>
teehee
> "...so many gamers ... take so much pleasure out of White Dwarf..."
>
> I know you have to write these editorials months in advance, but you're 234
> days late for April 1. Still, the belated attempt at humour is appreciated.
>
bwahaahaah
> "It's always great to spend time chatting with readers, finding out what they
> like the most or which parts of the magazine they think could be improved."
>
> The price, for starters - £3.50 and you only get 120 sheets of toilet paper.
>
the beasts of chaos was fantastic, it just reamed my whole army.
> "...whilst most of the comments are very similar..."
>
> Take away Gav's keyboard and give him a banana instead.
>
he'll probably stick it up his bum.
> "...there are always the odd gems that give me a new perspective on a specific
> area."
>
> This bit's crap.
> Oh, yes, so it is.
>
daddum
> "In fact, one of the biggest cheers of the weekend went up when I announced
> White Dwarf would be giving a regular slot to the Fanatic team to give quality
> coverage of Specialist Games."
>
> And soon after that, we'll give the design teams regular slots to give quality
> coverage to Warhammer and 40k. Promise.
>
bleh
> NEWS
>
> Warhammer Ancient Battles? In White Dwarf? Seriously? No, I don't believe it...
> Shieldwall, we are told, contains historical background ("the Vikings
> worshipped the great gods Khorne, Slaanesh, Nurgle and Tzeentch and rode War
> Mammoths to battle in their raids on the Old Wo...uh, Western Europe") as well
> as 28 regional army list (Hordes of Denmark, Beasts of Sweden...).
>
> Not much else of note - those who thought Tau figures were bad haven't seen the
> still for the Playstation game Fire Warrior, a second Liber Chaotica book is
> due (hadn't realised the first was out yet) and the Tomb Kings are due next
> month (big surprise - and why isn't their army deal listed here?) The observant
> among you may note that the preview on GW's website had the header 'New:
> Warhammer Armies Tomb Kings!' This has been replaced in the final issue by 'Two
> Battle Reports this Issue!' - I'd like to see GW try to claim they had always
> planned the TK for next month rather than this, especially as they couldn't be
> bothered to change the cover art.
>
TOmb kings is out this month in OZ, I've seen the box sets.
w00t command squad with jump packs and lightning claws, that would look
awesome.
> LURE OF THE GODS
>
> "Following the increased workload on the magazine last month..."
>
> We had to put something in with actual content. It really strained our
> abilities, I can tell you. Gav almost had an anurism.
>
Gave is an aneurysm.
> "Happily, this is no longer the case..."
>
> ...As you can see from this issue, no work at all has gone into its
> preparation. We didn't even bother with simple things like proofreading or
> selecting an appropriate cover.
>
teehee
> Sawyer's army vs. 20 Dark Riders led by two characters (seriously, that's the
> whole 1000pt army). Sawyer says that "I won't go into the details of this
> battle mainly because it wasn't a battle as such." Instead, it was what is
> often referred to as a 'massacre'. Odd that Sawyer had no qualms about waxing
> lyrical for two pages over his victory last month...
>
bwahahaahaha
> Sawyer decides to "seek solace in the fact that I'm highly unlikely to face an
> army like this again".
>
> Because he'll fire the next person to try it.
>
ROFLMAO
> Next, he faces a 1250pt Goblin army with, wait for it, 61 Goblins. Including
> characters, herders, Fanatics and Squig Hoppers. With no Wolf Riders and no
> missile troops. With a Giant and 3 Trolls, in a game barely higher than
> 1000pts. And even then the Chaos army failed to do any damage, if only because
> the Fanatics wiped out the Gobbos before they could.
>
> After this battle Sawyer decides to dismount his general from his pointless
> Chariot. Nice to see that even with limited amounts of cash he can still waste
> a lot of it. And to cap it all Sawyer's latest excuse for not buying any
> Marauders or even Warriors is that he wants 5 Screamers.
>
again, *sighs*
> PATH TO GLORY
>
> Chaos Warbands part II. The Power-specific Favour bonuses are a nice touch
> (gain 2 favour points for taking a Champion of the opposing Power out of
> action, for instance), though they seemed a bit lost on what else would be
> characterful for Nurgle. The mutations (6 in all) are disappointingly bland and
> necessarily lack variety, although as a whole these rules add to the last
> issue's basic warband rules. Campaign play is handled in a very low-detail way,
> and I'd recommend using the Mordheim D66 damage table rather than 'D6 - on a 1
> you're dead, otherwise you're fine' presented here. Also, being able to spend
> favour to ignore 1s makes it all but impossible even for henchmen to die; this
> ability should be reserved for the Champion only to make him a bit more
> special. Finally, there are no rules here for gaining extra equipment after
> battle except where rolled as favours.
>
a badly thought about game, they need to merge it into mordheim, what I
wouldn't give to have a marked Tzeentchian Sorcerer in Mordheim.
> CHAPTER APPROVED
>
> Necron and Tau Q&A. We learn that a Monolith can move and fire with its
> ordnance weapon. *sigh*
>
and that it's a piece of shit.
> LORDS OF NEHEKHARA: TOMB KINGS PREVIEW
>
> Shown are models we've all seen and, more interestingly, some of the book's
> art, which is brilliant. The cover picture is nice enough, but I can say,
> having browsed through the book, that there is a particular treat in the form
> of a full-colour chariot scene (the box art, maybe?). That's not shown here,
> but the art shown is all good (the mummies - maybe Ushabti? - in particular).
> Space McQuirk 'treats' us to a short story relating to the Tomb Kings. It
> features a pyramid - disappointing in a way, since the TK background otherwise
> does a good job of steering away from the pointy stereotype and tries for a
> more 'New Kingdom' feel. This story is all the more irritating because you can
> sense the imagery McQuirk is trying to create, but with his poor storytelling
> skills you can't quite picture it as vividly as you should be able to.
>
All the artwork I've seen has been pretty fantastic with the new GW stuff.
> LESS TALK, MORE ACTION!
>
> Another 'let's show off some of Fanatic's latest models and pretend we're
> supporting Specialist Games' piece. The new BFG Imperial ships look great, and
> the Inquisitor Kroot seems fine if apparently less detailed than the otherwise
> identical 40k-scale ones, and horribly painted. The Warmaster Winged Nightmare
> is innovative and very well-posed in a brooding, almost gargoyle-like stance.
> The Black Coach itself looks nice, but the horses pulling it completely ruin
> the overall effect.
>
If only they'd ship them to independant retailers in OZ.
> THE COMING OF THE BEAST
>
> DE, Eldar and Tyranid BFG battle report.
>
*lays a turd.*
> 'EAVY METAL MASTERCLASS
>
> The Daemon Prince, and the conversion of an Iron Warriors Daemon Prince (a very
> nice figure, though no parts for Legion-specific variants appear to be included
> in the Daemon Prince set).
>
this looks like the one from the Iron warriors army in last months
battle report, this is actually quite good from a disctance.
> THE HISTORY OF THE DAMNED
>
> Now this is unexpected, and certainly welcome - a racial chronology of the
> Undead (yes, you heard - not the Tomb Kings or the Vampire Counts, the
> *Undead*, as a whole). A useful resource for whoever was asking about the Tomb
> Kings backstory, a nice piece of nostalgia for those of us familiar with the
> 4th Ed. Undead, and more generally just an interesting and well-presented fluff
> piece of the sort all too rare in White Dwarf. This includes gems I'd forgotten
> such as the Dark Elves from whom Nagash learned Dark Magic in the days before
> he created necromancy. It includes a new entry after the Battle at La
> Maisontaal (with which the original timeline ended) which explains that Settra
> has embarked upon an attempt to recreate the glories of his lifetime with a new
> age of conquest - which satisfactorily explains why the Tomb Kings will come
> into conflict with most other races without reducing them to the shallow 'we
> hate all flessshy thingsss' stereotype I'd feared in light of the Necrubbish.
>
cool, something to look forward to.
> HEROES & VILLAINS OF THE 41st MILLENNIUM: AHRIMAN OF THE THOUSAND SONS
>
> A new fluff series covering special characters' backstories in detail (and it
> is detailed - we have four pages devoted to Ahriman, though one's a story
> piece).
>
Ahriman, cool, more fluff for tzeentch.
> 'EAVY METAL MASTERCLASS
>
> Tau Devilfish - a bit behind the times, aren't we?
>
bleh
> DEFEND TO THE LAST
>
> An interesting battle report, perhaps - HE vs. Goblins. Also interestingly,
> this is a weighted battle unlike most WD reports - 2,000pts of Gobbos vs. 1,000
> of High Elves. Although Warhammer makes plenty of provision for unequal forces
> in its scenarios (this is Rearguard), these are rarely the ones WD focuses on.
> The Goblins' paintscheme is worth an honourable mention, harking back to the
> darker colours favoured in the pages of the magazine in the 3rd Edition era
> (except for the white of the Night Gobbos' clothes, but it works), and very
> well executed at that.
>
> The High Elf player made an obvious mistake in army selection by sinking points
> into two Chariots - against large Gobbo units these just asked to be bogged
> down. Eagles were a better choice but taking four expensive single models in
> addition to the characters was unwise given the points constraints. By contrast
> the Gobbo army was very efficiently-designed for what it needed to achieve,
> being packed to the brim with Wolf Riders and Wolf Chariots.
>
> The resulting combat looked surprisingly close on these facts, but predictably
> the Elven attack stalled while there were still piles of Goblins remaining and
> the result was probably inevitable.
>
at least it makes a break from chaos, empire and dark elves.
> THE LORD OF THE RINGS
bleh.
--
the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King
"Can't sleep or the clowns will eat me!"
read the FAQ http://www.rgmw.org/
"Sam displays many of the traits that make RGMW 'the cesspit of
usenet'"-Mike Hunt aka Will
Insane Ranter
"the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King"
news:3DDD8D63...@spammersFOAD.optushome.com.au...
After reading the report.... The High Elf stragy was moronic.. lets split
over forces even though were out numbered so badly!!! What the hell would
you take chariots for in a game like this??? unless your trrying to loose..
John Hwang
>NEW RELEASES PRICE (£)
>
>WARHAMMER 40,000
>
>Chaos Daemon Prince £18
$25 USD. Sweet.
>Well, this is a pretty poor showing - with the Defiler, Chaos Predator, Death
>Guard and who knows, maybe new Sorcerer models to go you'd have thought
>something more could have been done. The models themselves are all very good,
>which is a nice change for the 40k Chaos range, but still.
A good model coming out. I'm happy.
>LURE OF THE GODS
>And to cap it all Sawyer's latest excuse for not buying any
>Marauders or even Warriors is that he wants 5 Screamers.
Who could have guessed he doesn't buy more Marauders?!?
--
--- John Hwang "JohnHw...@cs.com.no.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny
P Bowles
Elf Clowne King writes:
>> CHAPTER APPROVED
>>
>> Necron and Tau Q&A. We learn that a Monolith can move and fire with its
>> ordnance weapon. *sigh*
>>
>and that it's a piece of shit.
We knew that already, surely?
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
johnhw...@cs.com.no.com (John Hwang) writes:
>>LURE OF THE GODS
>
>>And to cap it all Sawyer's latest excuse for not buying any
>>Marauders or even Warriors is that he wants 5 Screamers.
>
>Who could have guessed he doesn't buy more Marauders?!?
>
It's probably in his contract that the series will end the moment he buys more
Marauders, so he's delaying it as long as possible.
December 2008: "And I'll just add my eighteenth Chaos Dragon to the army this
month..."
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
(incrdbil) writes:
>>"It's always great to spend time chatting with readers, finding out what
>they
>>like the most or which parts of the magazine they think could be improved."
>>
>>The price, for starters - £3.50 and you only get 120 sheets of toilet paper.
>
>Other than price, content, quality of layout, editing and value there
>is nothign wrong with WD.
>>
Hehe.
>>
>
>>INDEX ASTARTES FIRST FOUNDING - CLAWS OF THE RAVEN
>>
>
>>
>>The army list itself is condensed, taking a half-page format similar to the
>CSM
>>lists, and adding a series of special rules. Raven Guard can not only always
>>choose to use drop pods in deep strike missions, they can reroll the
>scatter.
>>The only drawback associated with this and a few other upgrades, most
>notably a
>>command squad with jump pack and lightning claw options for its members, is
>the
>>proviso that RG can only have as many HS choices as FA in their army.
>that's a drawback? Wow. 2 Speeder selections, two heavy. So much for
>the drawback.
That was more or less my thought.
>Perhaps more than 15 minutes needs to go into the creation of these
>lists.
What, and pull Sawyer away from painting figures to do some actual work? Never!
Philip Bowles
Andy
<<>>
> After reading the report.... The High Elf stragy was moronic.. lets split
> over forces even though were out numbered so badly!!! What the hell would
> you take chariots for in a game like this??? unless your trrying to loose..
Some people are smart, some are average, some are stupid.
They can't help themselves.
I see players make the same mistakes game after game.
Doesn't matter if you discuss after what went wrong and what they
could have done instead.
Next time.
There they are.
Same fucking stupid mistakes.
The quality of painting is something else I can't really get my head
round.
There will always be at least one army someone whips out looks like
they were randomly spattered with various mixes of mud instead of
paint.
It's not like the figures are dead cheap or they're only playing in
their house.
I'm not saying I'm some sort of paragon.
I routinely trade quality of paint job for speed.
Until you photograph the things and they're effectively magnified you
don't notice the difference.
What I'm thinking I done pretty slap-dash looks top-notch,
comparatively.
I got a new camera...
See what you think.
I reckon I did the unit of empire swordsmen about a 6 out of 10.
www.wargamer.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/index.htm
or
www.wargamer.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/sitemap.htm
or
http://www.wargamer.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fantasy/pics/empire_swordsmen.jpg
P Bowles
(Andy) writes:
>"Insane Ranter" <n...@spam.net> wrote in message
>news:<1HgD9.28315$%j3.2...@news.bellsouth.net>...
><<>>
>> After reading the report.... The High Elf stragy was moronic.. lets split
>> over forces even though were out numbered so badly!!! What the hell would
>> you take chariots for in a game like this??? unless your trrying to loose..
>
>
>Some people are smart, some are average, some are stupid.
>They can't help themselves.
But why can't WD help employing or showing off only the stupid ones? Okay,
maybe that's a little unfair - the Goblin player played reasonably well and his
selections were sound, but then he was the one who didn't work for GW.
>I got a new camera...
>See what you think.
Seems to need a more powerful flash for most of these shots.
>I reckon I did the unit of empire swordsmen about a 6 out of 10.
I can't really get perspective on it - it's enormous on my screen, too big to
see even one entire model without scrolling. The paint looks well-applied, but
with the blotchiness that tends to show up on such close images.
Philip Bowles
DJ Jizzy Bear
"P Bowles" <pbo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021121112717...@mb-cc.aol.com...
<snip>
You rock. Fatso should get you in to do the editorials.
--
DJ Jizzy Bear
"I'm in with the Out crowd..."
Putting hardcore spooge into music since yesterday afternoon. Respect!!!!!!!
DJ Jizzy Bear
I smell one coming.
P Bowles
<keepin...@homeboys.com> writes:
>"P Bowles" <pbo...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20021121112717...@mb-cc.aol.com...
>
><snip>
>
>You rock. Fatso should get you in to do the editorials.
Thanks. Though if he let me write the rest of the magazine, there wouldn't be a
need for editorials like mine...
Philip Bowles
Mikael
would have us believe that:
> Well, the newsgroup seems to be settling down to a semblance of topicality
> after a series of threads that promised to make November the new September,
> wicca nonsense and so forth. If I want to waste my time reading uninformative
> fantasy drivel, I'll buy...but you've already guessed where this is going,
> haven't you?
To start off, thanks for the overview. You regularly save me time since I
don't have to either a) read WD at the shop or b) ask Aaro what was in
it. =)
<snip>
> EDITORIAL
>
> Yes, I'll give this an honourable mention because some of Sawyer's comments
> show that he deserves to be humiliated in public:
>
<snip˝
> "...so many gamers ... take so much pleasure out of White Dwarf..."
LMAO!
<snip>
> NEWS
>
> Warhammer Ancient Battles? In White Dwarf? Seriously? No, I don't believe it...
> Shieldwall, we are told, contains historical background ("the Vikings
> worshipped the great gods Khorne, Slaanesh, Nurgle and Tzeentch and rode War
> Mammoths to battle in their raids on the Old Wo...uh, Western Europe") as well
> as 28 regional army list (Hordes of Denmark, Beasts of Sweden...).
Don't forget Tomb Kings of Norway.
<snip>
> INDEX ASTARTES FIRST FOUNDING - CLAWS OF THE RAVEN
>
> Claws of the Raven, eh? Imaginative title - when you consider that the
> alternative was probably 'Guard of the Raven'. While other Primarchs have
> sought perfection, learning or justice, or have become embittered by perceived
> wrongs, there is nothing sympathetic about Corax. We are given no details of
> his personality or beliefs, but are told simply that he was brought up to
> believe his destiny was to free some slaves, and he used the most ruthless and
> bloodthirsty methods to ensure that he was achieved, even at the cost of
> inciting civil war and disorder. Later, he subjected his own people to genetic
> experiements that would make Fabius Bile blanch, and the retrofitting of a
> desire to bring peace to the society he had thrown into anarchy and a search
> for redemption are very unconvincing.
Other than the last silly bit, this sounds like excellent fluff by GW
standards.
> Predictably, he does indeed quoth
> "Nevermore", but I'm disappointed it isn't the Raven Guard battlecry...
It will be if I ever put together an army...
<snip>
> The army list itself is condensed, taking a half-page format similar to the CSM
> lists, and adding a series of special rules. Raven Guard can not only always
> choose to use drop pods in deep strike missions, they can reroll the scatter.
Sweet. I should proxy some of these guys with skeletons and rock
Kellopyy's all-infantry IG.
> The only drawback associated with this and a few other upgrades, most notably a
> command squad with jump pack and lightning claw options for its members,
Crikey. How much are the LCs?
> is the
> proviso that RG can only have as many HS choices as FA in their army.
LOL. How is that any kind of drawback in an army that can make extensive
use of Drop Pods??
> LURE OF THE GODS
>
<snip>
> Sawyer's army vs. 20 Dark Riders led by two characters (seriously, that's the
> whole 1000pt army).
<cries>
> Sawyer says that "I won't go into the details of this
> battle mainly because it wasn't a battle as such." Instead, it was what is
> often referred to as a 'massacre'. Odd that Sawyer had no qualms about waxing
> lyrical for two pages over his victory last month...
Oh well, throw two completely inept armies at each other, and here we
go...
> Sawyer decides to "seek solace in the fact that I'm highly unlikely to face an
> army like this again".
>
> Because he'll fire the next person to try it.
Heh.
> Next, he faces a 1250pt Goblin army with, wait for it, 61 Goblins.
<sobs uncontrollably>
> Including
> characters, herders, Fanatics and Squig Hoppers. With no Wolf Riders and no
> missile troops. With a Giant and 3 Trolls, in a game barely higher than
> 1000pts.
<snip rest for sanity's sake>
<snip>
> THE HISTORY OF THE DAMNED
>
> Now this is unexpected, and certainly welcome - a racial chronology of the
> Undead (yes, you heard - not the Tomb Kings or the Vampire Counts, the
> *Undead*, as a whole). A useful resource for whoever was asking about the Tomb
> Kings backstory, a nice piece of nostalgia for those of us familiar with the
> 4th Ed. Undead, and more generally just an interesting and well-presented fluff
> piece of the sort all too rare in White Dwarf.
Excellent. I trust the whole Nagash story is in there? Has it changed
since 4th ed?
> This includes gems I'd forgotten
> such as the Dark Elves from whom Nagash learned Dark Magic in the days before
> he created necromancy.
You _forgot_ that? Poof.
> It includes a new entry after the Battle at La
> Maisontaal (with which the original timeline ended) which explains that Settra
> has embarked upon an attempt to recreate the glories of his lifetime with a new
> age of conquest - which satisfactorily explains why the Tomb Kings will come
> into conflict with most other races without reducing them to the shallow 'we
> hate all flessshy thingsss' stereotype I'd feared in light of the Necrubbish.
Crikey, sensible fluff? Sing along now, everyone: It's the end of the
world as we know it...
--
Mikael
--
"The University is the fountain of knowledge,
and the students are here to drink."
RGMW FAQ and stuff at http://www.rgmw.org
P Bowles
writes:
>In article <20021121112717...@mb-cc.aol.com>, pbo...@aol.com
>would have us believe that:
>> Well, the newsgroup seems to be settling down to a semblance of topicality
>> after a series of threads that promised to make November the new September,
>> wicca nonsense and so forth. If I want to waste my time reading
>uninformative
>> fantasy drivel, I'll buy...but you've already guessed where this is going,
>> haven't you?
>
>To start off, thanks for the overview. You regularly save me time since I
>don't have to either a) read WD at the shop or b) ask Aaro what was in
>it. =)
Aaro? That's either a misspelling of Aaron or a misspelling of a British
chocolate bar.
><snip>
>> EDITORIAL
>>
>> Yes, I'll give this an honourable mention because some of Sawyer's comments
>> show that he deserves to be humiliated in public:
>>
><snip˝
>> "...so many gamers ... take so much pleasure out of White Dwarf..."
>
>LMAO!
Let it not be said that Fat Bloke lacks a sense of irony.
><snip>
>> NEWS
>>
>> Warhammer Ancient Battles? In White Dwarf? Seriously? No, I don't believe
>it...
>> Shieldwall, we are told, contains historical background ("the Vikings
>> worshipped the great gods Khorne, Slaanesh, Nurgle and Tzeentch and rode
>War
>> Mammoths to battle in their raids on the Old Wo...uh, Western Europe") as
>well
>> as 28 regional army list (Hordes of Denmark, Beasts of Sweden...).
>
>Don't forget Tomb Kings of Norway.
My brain shut down after considering the Wood Finns.
><snip>
>> INDEX ASTARTES FIRST FOUNDING - CLAWS OF THE RAVEN
>>
>> Claws of the Raven, eh? Imaginative title - when you consider that the
>> alternative was probably 'Guard of the Raven'. While other Primarchs have
>> sought perfection, learning or justice, or have become embittered by
>perceived
>> wrongs, there is nothing sympathetic about Corax. We are given no details
>of
>> his personality or beliefs, but are told simply that he was brought up to
>> believe his destiny was to free some slaves, and he used the most ruthless
>and
>> bloodthirsty methods to ensure that he was achieved, even at the cost of
>> inciting civil war and disorder. Later, he subjected his own people to
>genetic
>> experiements that would make Fabius Bile blanch, and the retrofitting of a
>> desire to bring peace to the society he had thrown into anarchy and a
>search
>> for redemption are very unconvincing.
>
>Other than the last silly bit, this sounds like excellent fluff by GW
>standards.
:-) If excellent involves being dark and nasty, certainly, but I'd like to be
able to relate to major characters, or at least have some idea whether they
have a personality.
>> The only drawback associated with this and a few other upgrades, most
>notably a
>> command squad with jump pack and lightning claw options for its members,
>
>Crikey. How much are the LCs?
30pts per model, but only available to command models with jump packs.
>> is the
>> proviso that RG can only have as many HS choices as FA in their army.
>
>LOL. How is that any kind of drawback in an army that can make extensive
>use of Drop Pods??
I've been wondering, and still haven't come up with an answer.
>> Sawyer says that "I won't go into the details of this
>> battle mainly because it wasn't a battle as such." Instead, it was what is
>> often referred to as a 'massacre'. Odd that Sawyer had no qualms about
>waxing
>> lyrical for two pages over his victory last month...
>
>Oh well, throw two completely inept armies at each other, and here we
>go...
Even Dark Elves have a tough time being as inept as Sawyer's army - IIRC he has
yet to beat a DE army despite having fought them more often than anyone else.
Only Orcs and Goblins can be inept enough for Sawyer to have a chance, and
that's because they're so inept they do all the killing for him.
>> THE HISTORY OF THE DAMNED
>>
>> Now this is unexpected, and certainly welcome - a racial chronology of the
>> Undead (yes, you heard - not the Tomb Kings or the Vampire Counts, the
>> *Undead*, as a whole). A useful resource for whoever was asking about the
>Tomb
>> Kings backstory, a nice piece of nostalgia for those of us familiar with
>the
>> 4th Ed. Undead, and more generally just an interesting and well-presented
>fluff
>> piece of the sort all too rare in White Dwarf.
>
>Excellent. I trust the whole Nagash story is in there?
Yes, though his original rise to power in Khemri was skipped over as 'by murder
and intrigue he took control'.
Has it changed
>since 4th ed?
Not Nagash's tale, no, except for the minor addition of Wsoran the Necrarch
allying with him. As presented here, the vampire fluff does actually make sense
(except for the Blood Dragons, who just flee and are never mentioned again) and
does add to the story - the Strigoi fellow expands on the brief 4th Ed. mention
of the Ghoul King, Neferata is significant (another new addition, the Tomb King
woman special character, briefly features before Neferata kills her) and the
Necrarchs are distinguished from the others via their alliance with Nagash. I
just wish the army wasn't presented in the way it was - back in 4th Edition,
every component of an Undead army and its relationship to Nagash (and therefore
necromancers in general) was explained - the tribes that became the Ghouls, the
Wights raised from their barrows, the vampires learning from Nagash's books,
all of it. With the Vampires in charge, you just have a bunch of B-movie
monsters thrown together - as I've said numerous times, Munsters. The Undead
list needed to be split, and the Tomb Kings have gained huge fluff benefits (oh
yes, and Ushabti), but the Vampires are the wrong army.
There should be a TK list and a Necromancer list. Distinguish the vampires by
all means, at least in fluff, but keep them in the appropriate places - the
Necrarchs in the remnants of Lahmia, the Lahmians as refugees scattered around
the world, the Strigoi as Old World itinerants and of course the von Carsteins
in the Dracula role. Oh, and ditch the Blood Dragons.
>> This includes gems I'd forgotten
>> such as the Dark Elves from whom Nagash learned Dark Magic in the days
>before
>> he created necromancy.
>
>You _forgot_ that? Poof.
Well, at least it was here to remind me.
>> It includes a new entry after the Battle at La
>> Maisontaal (with which the original timeline ended) which explains that
>Settra
>> has embarked upon an attempt to recreate the glories of his lifetime with a
>new
>> age of conquest - which satisfactorily explains why the Tomb Kings will
>come
>> into conflict with most other races without reducing them to the shallow
>'we
>> hate all flessshy thingsss' stereotype I'd feared in light of the
>Necrubbish.
>
>Crikey, sensible fluff? Sing along now, everyone: It's the end of the
>world as we know it...
Actually, I'm a great fan of Alessio's fluff - this Undead timeline shows that
he has sense enough to leave good, established stuff alone and although he
couldn't correct the problems with Vampire background, the Strigoi are probably
the most intelligent of the Vampire lineages in their inspiration, coming from
European myth rather than B-movies or books. He may not have added to the
Empire fluff but he presented it extremely well, and while I haven't read the
Skaven book the rules he introduced show that he has a good handle on their
theme, if not quite as firm a grasp of game balance.
Philip Bowles
Mikael
> In article <MPG.1848899c3...@news.inet.fi>, Mikael <mik...@ci5.gov>
> writes:
>
> >In article <20021121112717...@mb-cc.aol.com>, pbo...@aol.com
> >would have us believe that:
> >> Well, the newsgroup seems to be settling down to a semblance of topicality
> >> after a series of threads that promised to make November the new September,
> >> wicca nonsense and so forth. If I want to waste my time reading
> >uninformative
> >> fantasy drivel, I'll buy...but you've already guessed where this is going,
> >> haven't you?
> >
> >To start off, thanks for the overview. You regularly save me time since I
> >don't have to either a) read WD at the shop or b) ask Aaro what was in
> >it. =)
>
> Aaro? That's either a misspelling of Aaron or a misspelling of a British
> chocolate bar.
It's a Finnish first name; a derivative of Aaron.
<snip>
> >> EDITORIAL
> >>
> >> Yes, I'll give this an honourable mention because some of Sawyer's comments
> >> show that he deserves to be humiliated in public:
> >>
> ><snip½
> >> "...so many gamers ... take so much pleasure out of White Dwarf..."
> >
> >LMAO!
>
> Let it not be said that Fat Bloke lacks a sense of irony.
Apparently...
<snip>
> >> NEWS
> >>
> >> Warhammer Ancient Battles? In White Dwarf? Seriously? No, I don't believe
> >it...
> >> Shieldwall, we are told, contains historical background ("the Vikings
> >> worshipped the great gods Khorne, Slaanesh, Nurgle and Tzeentch and rode
> >War
> >> Mammoths to battle in their raids on the Old Wo...uh, Western Europe") as
> >well
> >> as 28 regional army list (Hordes of Denmark, Beasts of Sweden...).
> >
> >Don't forget Tomb Kings of Norway.
>
> My brain shut down after considering the Wood Finns.
Don't worry, our lot were never Vikings. Some hitch-hiked along, though,
so maybe Regiments of Finns as rare choices?
<snip>
> >> INDEX ASTARTES FIRST FOUNDING - CLAWS OF THE RAVEN
> >>
<snip>
> >
> >Other than the last silly bit, this sounds like excellent fluff by GW
> >standards.
>
> :-) If excellent involves being dark and nasty, certainly,
It did in the good old days, damn it. None of this newfangled goody-two-
shoes nonsense. <grumble>
> but I'd like to be
> able to relate to major characters, or at least have some idea whether they
> have a personality.
Well, yes. Then again, this is always a problem with GW fluff...
> >> The only drawback associated with this and a few other upgrades, most
> >notably a
> >> command squad with jump pack and lightning claw options for its members,
> >
> >Crikey. How much are the LCs?
>
> 30pts per model, but only available to command models with jump packs.
So, a Command squad trooper with a pair of lightning claws would cost
what? 70 points?
> >> is the
> >> proviso that RG can only have as many HS choices as FA in their army.
> >
> >LOL. How is that any kind of drawback in an army that can make extensive
> >use of Drop Pods??
>
> I've been wondering, and still haven't come up with an answer.
Well, you probably won't... Sounds like a good Marine list to me.
<snip>
> >> THE HISTORY OF THE DAMNED
> >>
> >> Now this is unexpected, and certainly welcome - a racial chronology of the
> >> Undead (yes, you heard - not the Tomb Kings or the Vampire Counts, the
> >> *Undead*, as a whole). A useful resource for whoever was asking about the
> >Tomb
> >> Kings backstory, a nice piece of nostalgia for those of us familiar with
> >the
> >> 4th Ed. Undead, and more generally just an interesting and well-presented
> >fluff
> >> piece of the sort all too rare in White Dwarf.
> >
> >Excellent. I trust the whole Nagash story is in there?
>
> Yes, though his original rise to power in Khemri was skipped over as 'by murder
> and intrigue he took control'.
Oh well. Can't have it all, I suppose.
> Has it changed
> >since 4th ed?
>
> Not Nagash's tale, no, except for the minor addition of Wsoran the Necrarch
> allying with him.
Acceptable.
> As presented here, the vampire fluff does actually make sense
> (except for the Blood Dragons, who just flee and are never mentioned again) and
> does add to the story - the Strigoi fellow expands on the brief 4th Ed. mention
> of the Ghoul King,
This is the same stuff as in the Vampire Counts army book, I presume?
> Neferata is significant (another new addition, the Tomb King
> woman special character, briefly features before Neferata kills her) and the
> Necrarchs are distinguished from the others via their alliance with Nagash.
The latter was hinted at in Vampire Counts, I believe.
> I
> just wish the army wasn't presented in the way it was - back in 4th Edition,
> every component of an Undead army and its relationship to Nagash (and therefore
> necromancers in general) was explained - the tribes that became the Ghouls, the
> Wights raised from their barrows, the vampires learning from Nagash's books,
> all of it.
I do remember. It was excellent. See, I can rationalize playing Vampire
Counts by using the old fluff.
> With the Vampires in charge, you just have a bunch of B-movie
> monsters thrown together - as I've said numerous times, Munsters.
> The Undead
> list needed to be split, and the Tomb Kings have gained huge fluff benefits (oh
> yes, and Ushabti), but the Vampires are the wrong army.
Not at all. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the Vampire Counts
concept, and if you take a moment to read the Bestiary section of the VC
book, you'll find that it's _not_ "a bunch of B-movie monsters", far from
it. Sure, the Tomb Kings gained a lot of fluff, which is excellent, but
IMHO their list seems to be a "The Mummy Returns!" style undead +
monsters kitbash. The VC list is coherent and very fluffy.
> There should be a TK list and a Necromancer list. Distinguish the vampires by
> all means, at least in fluff, but keep them in the appropriate places - the
> Necrarchs in the remnants of Lahmia, the Lahmians as refugees scattered around
> the world, the Strigoi as Old World itinerants and of course the von Carsteins
> in the Dracula role.
How is this different from the current VC concept? And why only a Tomb
King and Necromancer list? What happened to the von Carstein invasions,
then?
> Oh, and ditch the Blood Dragons.
Why? It's a new take on Vampires, and god knows we haven't seen that for
nearly a century.
> >> This includes gems I'd forgotten
> >> such as the Dark Elves from whom Nagash learned Dark Magic in the days
> >before
> >> he created necromancy.
> >
> >You _forgot_ that? Poof.
>
> Well, at least it was here to remind me.
True.
> >> It includes a new entry after the Battle at La
> >> Maisontaal (with which the original timeline ended) which explains that
> >Settra
> >> has embarked upon an attempt to recreate the glories of his lifetime with a
> >new
> >> age of conquest - which satisfactorily explains why the Tomb Kings will
> >come
> >> into conflict with most other races without reducing them to the shallow
> >'we
> >> hate all flessshy thingsss' stereotype I'd feared in light of the
> >Necrubbish.
> >
> >Crikey, sensible fluff? Sing along now, everyone: It's the end of the
> >world as we know it...
>
> Actually, I'm a great fan of Alessio's fluff - this Undead timeline shows that
> he has sense enough to leave good, established stuff alone and although he
> couldn't correct the problems with Vampire background,
What problems would these be?
> the Strigoi are probably
> the most intelligent of the Vampire lineages in their inspiration, coming from
> European myth rather than B-movies or books.
I liked them.
> He may not have added to the
> Empire fluff but he presented it extremely well, and while I haven't read the
> Skaven book the rules he introduced show that he has a good handle on their
> theme, if not quite as firm a grasp of game balance.
I haven't read much of either, but he seems to be able to make lists and
fluff into coherent wholes. Admirable considering he works for GW.
DJ Jizzy Bear
smithdoerr
> I can't really get perspective on it - it's enormous on my screen, too big
to
> see even one entire model without scrolling. The paint looks well-applied,
but
> with the blotchiness that tends to show up on such close images.
I'd download the latest version of IE as it automatically resizes pictures
to fit inside your browser window. And you can still click on the pic to
see it in it's full size scrolling glory if you really want.
--
-smithdoerr
smithdoerr
Now now, he only paints minis during his lunch break. However, he doesn't
seem to be losing any weight...
--
-smithdoerr
smithdoerr
"Mikael" <mik...@ci5.gov> wrote in message
news:MPG.18489d779...@news.inet.fi...
> In article <20021122122610...@mb-fp.aol.com>, pbo...@aol.com
> would have us believe that:
> > In article <MPG.1848899c3...@news.inet.fi>, Mikael
<mik...@ci5.gov>
> > writes:
> >
> > >In article <20021121112717...@mb-cc.aol.com>,
pbo...@aol.com
> > >> is the
> > >> proviso that RG can only have as many HS choices as FA in their army.
> > >
> > >LOL. How is that any kind of drawback in an army that can make
extensive
> > >use of Drop Pods??
> >
> > I've been wondering, and still haven't come up with an answer.
>
> Well, you probably won't... Sounds like a good Marine list to me.
Reminds me of a homebrew chapter list I saw once where the Devastators had
BS 5 and the Assault Troops had WS 5. The "disadvantage" of the list was
that the Devastator's WS and the Assaulties' BS was only 3. I think the guy
was trying to get a job at GW.
--
-smithdoerr
the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King
expensive, maybe not as much as a Thousand Son Chaos Lord with full
retinue of sorcerers, but expensive nonetheless.
--
the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King
P Bowles
writes:
>> >> Warhammer Ancient Battles? In White Dwarf? Seriously? No, I don't
>believe
>> >it...
>> >> Shieldwall, we are told, contains historical background ("the Vikings
>> >> worshipped the great gods Khorne, Slaanesh, Nurgle and Tzeentch and rode
>> >War
>> >> Mammoths to battle in their raids on the Old Wo...uh, Western Europe")
>as
>> >well
>> >> as 28 regional army list (Hordes of Denmark, Beasts of Sweden...).
>> >
>> >Don't forget Tomb Kings of Norway.
>>
>> My brain shut down after considering the Wood Finns.
>
>Don't worry, our lot were never Vikings. Some hitch-hiked along, though,
>so maybe Regiments of Finns as rare choices?
Don't forget the enemies of the Vikings are included. The English get to use
Fenbeasts, or as they are now known, Bogs of War.
> but I'd like to be
>> able to relate to major characters, or at least have some idea whether they
>> have a personality.
>
>Well, yes. Then again, this is always a problem with GW fluff...
Never mind fluff, it's a problem with GW writers...
>> >> The only drawback associated with this and a few other upgrades, most
>> >notably a
>> >> command squad with jump pack and lightning claw options for its members,
>> >
>> >Crikey. How much are the LCs?
>>
>> 30pts per model, but only available to command models with jump packs.
>
>So, a Command squad trooper with a pair of lightning claws would cost
>what? 70 points?
*shrug* Something like that.
>> As presented here, the vampire fluff does actually make sense
>> (except for the Blood Dragons, who just flee and are never mentioned again)
>and
>> does add to the story - the Strigoi fellow expands on the brief 4th Ed.
>mention
>> of the Ghoul King,
>
>This is the same stuff as in the Vampire Counts army book, I presume?
Yes, though truncated.
>> I
>> just wish the army wasn't presented in the way it was - back in 4th
>Edition,
>> every component of an Undead army and its relationship to Nagash (and
>therefore
>> necromancers in general) was explained - the tribes that became the Ghouls,
>the
>> Wights raised from their barrows, the vampires learning from Nagash's
>books,
>> all of it.
>
>I do remember. It was excellent. See, I can rationalize playing Vampire
>Counts by using the old fluff.
Or just use a Necromancer as the army general.
>> With the Vampires in charge, you just have a bunch of B-movie
>> monsters thrown together - as I've said numerous times, Munsters.
>> The Undead
>> list needed to be split, and the Tomb Kings have gained huge fluff benefits
>(oh
>> yes, and Ushabti), but the Vampires are the wrong army.
>
>Not at all. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the Vampire Counts
>concept, and if you take a moment to read the Bestiary section of the VC
>book, you'll find that it's _not_ "a bunch of B-movie monsters", far from
>it.
Zombies, skellies, ghouls, monster bats that look as convincing as the rubber
models in low-budget Dracula clones, wolves, vampires inspired by film
temptresses and Bram Stoker. No werewolves or Frankenstein's monster, but those
are the only stereotypes missing. The Strigoi go a little way to giving the
newer fluff more depth, but not far enough.
Sure, the Tomb Kings gained a lot of fluff, which is excellent, but
>IMHO their list seems to be a "The Mummy Returns!" style undead +
>monsters kitbash.
Too many monsters, certainly, but it's kept the original theme of the 4th Ed.
Undead and created an army style which is more coherent and inventive.
The VC list is coherent and very fluffy.
I'd disagree on both counts, the latter especially. For coherency - well,
everything is a close combat troop of some variety, if that counts. On the
other hand, the zombie/skeleton distinction is all but redundant with the two
units having similar points values and similar profiles - a single regiment
with a 40-model maximum (the Khemri approach) makes more intuitive sense. The
army relies too much on underpriced special units and not enough on its grunts.
Ghouls are handled well, but that's about it.
>> There should be a TK list and a Necromancer list. Distinguish the vampires
>by
>> all means, at least in fluff, but keep them in the appropriate places - the
>> Necrarchs in the remnants of Lahmia, the Lahmians as refugees scattered
>around
>> the world, the Strigoi as Old World itinerants and of course the von
>Carsteins
>> in the Dracula role.
>
>How is this different from the current VC concept?
The current VC concept is that Sylvania is a retirement home for all manner of
ghosties and ghoulies. I can just picture a zombie reminiscing "I was in Night
of the Living Dead, you know" or "Things were so much better when I was
alive..." It completely ruined the menace and the brooding atmosphere of the
real vC (von Carstein) Sylvania background. Now the place is crawling with
vampires of every stereotype imaginable. It's another credit to Alessio that
his vampires, the Strigoi, are the only ones who aren't based in Sylvania.
And why only a Tomb
>King and Necromancer list? What happened to the von Carstein invasions,
>then?
There's no reason you couldn't have a vampire-led Necromancer army; after all,
you can have VC armies led by Necromancers or TK armies led by Liche Priests if
you so desire. But these are the exception rather than the norm, and what's
more von Carstein invasions tend to be led by a von Carstein - just as in 4th
Ed., you can represent them by using a normal army led by a vC special
character. But it makes a lot more sense and is in line with older fluff for
Necromancers to control armies of the Undead rather than vampires, with whom
magic-using has always been a relatively minor talent in any case. Necromancers
also have a habit of popping up anywhere; with the vampires confined to
Sylvania it is hard to suspend belief when all the Wights from the north and
Ghouls from the rest of the world find themselves gravitating to this one small
backwater.
>> Oh, and ditch the Blood Dragons.
>
>Why? It's a new take on Vampires, and god knows we haven't seen that for
>nearly a century.
Hardly new - vampires have always been portrayed as powerful fighters and noble
figures; a Blood Dragon just happens to be one on a horse. I would like to
think that the Blood Dragons are an allusion to Vlad Drakul's history as a
member of the knightly Order of the Dragon, but I don't credit the chimps with
that much thought. They just wanted another armoured bonehead of the sort who
leads most of the other armies. In the context of the fluff, the fact that the
Blood Dragons are vampires is almost an irrelevance - they're just another
breed of knight.
>> Actually, I'm a great fan of Alessio's fluff - this Undead timeline shows
>that
>> he has sense enough to leave good, established stuff alone and although he
>> couldn't correct the problems with Vampire background,
>
>What problems would these be?
See above.
>> the Strigoi are probably
>> the most intelligent of the Vampire lineages in their inspiration, coming
>from
>> European myth rather than B-movies or books.
>
>I liked them.
Me too - and while some of the other ideas Alessio presented as alternatives
when the VC book came out had promise, I think he made the right decision in
choosing the Strigoi as his archetype.
>> He may not have added to the
>> Empire fluff but he presented it extremely well, and while I haven't read
>the
>> Skaven book the rules he introduced show that he has a good handle on their
>> theme, if not quite as firm a grasp of game balance.
>
>I haven't read much of either, but he seems to be able to make lists and
>fluff into coherent wholes.
And at least two of them are well-balanced...
> Admirable considering he works for GW.
It's only the English who are dullards...
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
<spamc...@notreal.com> writes:
Tell me, were his initials G. T.? And did he get the job?
Philip Bowles
Qrab
DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King <mani...@spammersFOAD.optushome.com.au>
wrote:
> P Bowles wrote:
PRICE (£)
> >
> > WARHAMMER 40,000
> >
> > Chaos Daemon Prince £18
> > Chaos Havoc with heavy bolter £5
> > Chaos Havoc with missile launcher £5
> >
> > Well, this is a pretty poor showing - with the Defiler, Chaos
> > Predator, Death Guard and who knows, maybe new Sorcerer models to
> > go you'd have thought something more could have been done. The
> > models themselves are all very good, which is a nice change for
> > the 40k Chaos range, but still.
> >
> The defiler is still in the works, but these guys look pretty damend
> good.
The Missile Launcher is OK, but both the Heavy Bolter and Autocannon
dudes look weak. The old Heavy Bolter was much better (damn, I sound
like Blackheart).
--
Be seeing you-
Qrab
remove yourhead to reply
John Hwang
>johnhw...@cs.com.no.com (John Hwang) writes:
>
>>>LURE OF THE GODS
>>
>>>And to cap it all Sawyer's latest excuse for not buying any
>>>Marauders or even Warriors is that he wants 5 Screamers.
>>
>>Who could have guessed he doesn't buy more Marauders?!?
>
>It's probably in his contract that the series will end the moment
> he buys more Marauders, so he's delaying it as long as possible.
>
>December 2008: "And I'll just add my eighteenth Chaos
>Dragon to the army this month..."
".. because, even though I really do need more Marauders, I just can't be arsed
to assemble and paint them."
John Hwang
>"P Bowles" <pbo...@aol.com> wrote ...
>>incr...@flinthills.com (incrdbil) writes:
>
>> >Perhaps more than 15 minutes needs to go into the creation of these
>> >lists.
>>
>> What, and pull Sawyer away from painting figures to do some actual
>> work? Never!
>
>Now now, he only paints minis during his lunch break. However, he
>doesn't seem to be losing any weight...
That's because he still eats his breakfast, has a few bacon butties with his
morning break, crumpets at afternoon tea time, and appetizers during happy
hour... A man that big has to work at keeping his weight up.
DJ Jizzy Bear
"the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King"
<snip>
> >
> Give them terminator honours and you've got a very nice unit, and really
> expensive, maybe not as much as a Thousand Son Chaos Lord with full
> retinue of sorcerers, but expensive nonetheless.
See above.
P Bowles
<qr...@san.rr.yourhead.com> writes:
>> The defiler is still in the works, but these guys look pretty damend
>> good.
>
>The Missile Launcher is OK, but both the Heavy Bolter and Autocannon
>dudes look weak. The old Heavy Bolter was much better (damn, I sound
>like Blackheart).
I'd have said the reverse - the heavy bolter is a particularly good fugure, but
the ML's a bit clunky. Nevertheless, I like both. And the Daemon, although I
remain to be convinced that it is replete with good conversion opportunities -
though the IW conversion looks nice, it's just a head and weapon swap when
all's said and done.
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
<keepin...@homeboys.com> writes:
><snip>
>
>> >
>> Give them terminator honours and you've got a very nice unit, and really
>> expensive, maybe not as much as a Thousand Son Chaos Lord with full
>> retinue of sorcerers, but expensive nonetheless.
>
>See above.
What, "<snip>"?
Philip Bowles
Andy
<<>>
> >I got a new camera...
> >See what you think.
>
> Seems to need a more powerful flash for most of these shots.
Oh...
They're mostly scanned.
There's only the swordsmen are with the camera.
Obviously.
I'm going to be taking more pictures with the camera.
Nikon coolpix 4300.
DJ Jizzy Bear
It was a hint for Sam.
John Hwang
> Qrab <qr...@san.rr.yourhead.com> writes:
>
>>> The defiler is still in the works, but these guys look pretty damend
>>> good.
>>
>>The Missile Launcher is OK, but both the Heavy Bolter and Autocannon
>>dudes look weak. The old Heavy Bolter was much better (damn, I sound
>>like Blackheart).
>
>I'd have said the reverse - the heavy bolter is a particularly good fugure,
Sorry, but I've got to side with Q here. The old CSM HB is better. I don't
like the new one at all. The pose just doesn't work for me. Even the SM HB is
better.
>but the ML's a bit clunky. Nevertheless, I like both. And the Daemon, although
I
>remain to be convinced that it is replete with good conversion opportunities
It doesn't need much, tho the GW guys said the backpack was designed to be
swapped out for Dragon Wings, so I think that this will make it's way out as a
Fantasy model later...
P Bowles
johnhw...@cs.com.no.com (John Hwang) writes:
>>but the ML's a bit clunky. Nevertheless, I like both. And the Daemon,
>although
>I
>>remain to be convinced that it is replete with good conversion opportunities
>
>It doesn't need much, tho the GW guys said the backpack was designed to be
>swapped out for Dragon Wings, so I think that this will make it's way out as
>a
>Fantasy model later...
If you want a great hulking thing with a giant hand weapon, kai gun and
optional dragon wings, this is no doubt true. If you want more variety, you'd
be better knocking together a Daemon Prince from other bits and pieces in the
range. For instance, I have an idea for an angel of death Nurgle DP - Carrion
wings, scythe and head from the Nurgle Lord and robed body from the Inquisitor
Chaos Magus (problem is the WFB components are likely to be too small - the
head at a pinch could be made from a cowled INQ scale head and possibly Orion's
horns, but there aren't any oversized scythes in any range).
Philip Bowles
John Hwang
>>>that it is replete with good conversion opportunities
>>
>>It doesn't need much, tho the GW guys said the backpack was designed
>>to be swapped out for Dragon Wings, so I think that this will make it's
>>way out as a Fantasy model later...
>
>If you want a great hulking thing with a giant hand weapon,
This works in WFB.
>kai gun
I'm sure that arm would be swapped out.
>and optional dragon wings, this is no doubt true. If you want more variety,
you'd
>be better knocking together a Daemon Prince from other bits and pieces in the
>range. For instance, I have an idea for an angel of death Nurgle DP - Carrion
>wings, scythe and head from the Nurgle Lord and robed body from the
>Inquisitor Chaos Magus (problem is the WFB components are likely to
>be too small - the head at a pinch could be made from a cowled INQ scale head
Adeptus Mechanicus?
>and possibly Orion's horns, but there aren't any oversized scythes in any
range).
Easy enough to make, IMO.
Erik Setzer
>WARHAMMER 40,000: LURKING EVIL
>
>Battle report - DA vs. Necrons. Bleh. Armageddon should have nothing to do with
>Necrons; nor, of course, should the 40k universe as a whole.
>
>Curious fact - here we are told that a Necron structure has been on Armageddon
>'for over six hundred millennia'. Seems the chimps really have confused
>'millennia' with 'million', either here or in the original background.
Already read this a couple months or so ago. Interesting how the DA
player keeps firing at the Monolith when almost everyone who's ever
thought about it realizes the Dreadnought had the best chance to down
it to begin with...
>CHAPTER APPROVED
>
>Necron and Tau Q&A. We learn that a Monolith can move and fire with its
>ordnance weapon. *sigh*
But it *can't* fire other weapons or teleport troops if it does so,
which makes me feel a little better about it.
>LESS TALK, MORE ACTION!
>
>Another 'let's show off some of Fanatic's latest models and pretend we're
>supporting Specialist Games' piece. The new BFG Imperial ships look great, and
>the Inquisitor Kroot seems fine if apparently less detailed than the otherwise
>identical 40k-scale ones, and horribly painted. The Warmaster Winged Nightmare
>is innovative and very well-posed in a brooding, almost gargoyle-like stance.
>The Black Coach itself looks nice, but the horses pulling it completely ruin
>the overall effect.
The Specialist Games and LOTR figs are, IMO, getting GW's best
sculpting jobs lately. Though the Tomb Kings and Daemon Hunters are
looking to be decent. I'm not too sure about the SG coverage in WD,
but hey, I guess it's at least something useful.
>THE HISTORY OF THE DAMNED
>
>Now this is unexpected, and certainly welcome - a racial chronology of the
>Undead (yes, you heard - not the Tomb Kings or the Vampire Counts, the
>*Undead*, as a whole). A useful resource for whoever was asking about the Tomb
>Kings backstory, a nice piece of nostalgia for those of us familiar with the
>4th Ed. Undead, and more generally just an interesting and well-presented fluff
>piece of the sort all too rare in White Dwarf. This includes gems I'd forgotten
>such as the Dark Elves from whom Nagash learned Dark Magic in the days before
>he created necromancy. It includes a new entry after the Battle at La
>Maisontaal (with which the original timeline ended) which explains that Settra
>has embarked upon an attempt to recreate the glories of his lifetime with a new
>age of conquest - which satisfactorily explains why the Tomb Kings will come
>into conflict with most other races without reducing them to the shallow 'we
>hate all flessshy thingsss' stereotype I'd feared in light of the Necrubbish.
Nice. I like the idea of having more fluff pieces like this.
>HEROES & VILLAINS OF THE 41st MILLENNIUM: AHRIMAN OF THE THOUSAND SONS
>
>A new fluff series covering special characters' backstories in detail (and it
>is detailed - we have four pages devoted to Ahriman, though one's a story
>piece).
Good, about time they gave some attention to some of these characters.
What I'm wondering is when they'll realize what a wonderful campaign
they could create with the story of Ahriman's seeking entry to the
Black Library. It would, as they said, make him as powerful as a god.
-Erik
P Bowles
johnhw...@cs.com.no.com (John Hwang) writes:
>>kai gun
>
>I'm sure that arm would be swapped out.
And all the CSM armour on the other bits? Even the head with its rivets?
>>and optional dragon wings, this is no doubt true. If you want more variety,
>you'd
>>be better knocking together a Daemon Prince from other bits and pieces in
>the
>>range. For instance, I have an idea for an angel of death Nurgle DP -
>Carrion
>>wings, scythe and head from the Nurgle Lord and robed body from the
>>Inquisitor Chaos Magus (problem is the WFB components are likely to
>>be too small - the head at a pinch could be made from a cowled INQ scale
>head
>
>Adeptus Mechanicus?
I haven't looked at that one - thanks for the idea. Or maybe I'll make a Green
Stuff cowl for a dessicated Daemonhost head.
>>and possibly Orion's horns, but there aren't any oversized scythes in any
>range).
>
>Easy enough to make, IMO.
Well, the blade is simple enough - Chaos Warrior chariot scythe - but the haft?
Bearing in mind that it needs to look like a fairly crude wooden weapon with a
couple of bends along its length.
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
writes:
>>Battle report - DA vs. Necrons. Bleh. Armageddon should have nothing to do
>with
>>Necrons; nor, of course, should the 40k universe as a whole.
>>
>>Curious fact - here we are told that a Necron structure has been on
>Armageddon
>>'for over six hundred millennia'. Seems the chimps really have confused
>>'millennia' with 'million', either here or in the original background.
>
>Already read this a couple months or so ago. Interesting how the DA
>player keeps firing at the Monolith when almost everyone who's ever
>thought about it realizes the Dreadnought had the best chance to down
>it to begin with...
This is a battle report using large war machines. Its intent is to persuade
munckins to buy their huge ugly model, not to exemplify good tactics. They did
this by briefing the DA player to pretend it was a huge threat (even though it
did nothing of any great significance in the game). That way the kiddies would
think "kewl, this thing can survive almost anything and it's super-leet!!! Me
wants!"
Philip Bowles
Erik Setzer
>>Already read this a couple months or so ago. Interesting how the DA
>>player keeps firing at the Monolith when almost everyone who's ever
>>thought about it realizes the Dreadnought had the best chance to down
>>it to begin with...
>
>This is a battle report using large war machines. Its intent is to persuade
>munckins to buy their huge ugly model, not to exemplify good tactics. They did
>this by briefing the DA player to pretend it was a huge threat (even though it
>did nothing of any great significance in the game). That way the kiddies would
>think "kewl, this thing can survive almost anything and it's super-leet!!! Me
>wants!"
That does seem to be their MO. I still can't understand people
calling the Monolith cheese, considering its overall effect on any
given battle.
-Erik
Qrab
pbo...@aol.com (P Bowles) wrote:
> In article <qrab-E58D47.1...@news-server.san.rr.com>,
> Qrab <qr...@san.rr.yourhead.com> writes:
>
> >> The defiler is still in the works, but these guys look pretty
> >> damend good.
> >
> >The Missile Launcher is OK, but both the Heavy Bolter and
> >Autocannon dudes look weak. The old Heavy Bolter was much better
> >(damn, I sound like Blackheart).
>
> I'd have said the reverse - the heavy bolter is a particularly good
> fugure, but the ML's a bit clunky. Nevertheless, I like both.
Have you seen the heavy bolter model in person? He's got girl wrists
and looks awkward. The ML isn't the most elegent model, but he doesn't
look awkward. The best of them all is the lascannon. The AC is ass.
Qrab
pbo...@aol.com (P Bowles) wrote:
I am in total agreement with you here. The DP model looks good, but
there is very little opportunity to personalize it. Perhaps GW plans
on releasing some parts to customize. The fact remains, however, that
no matter what, the model is locked in that 3/4 turned, hunched
position, which means no matter what you add to it, they'll all be too
similar for me.
P Bowles
<qr...@san.rr.yourhead.com> writes:
>I am in total agreement with you here.
Had to happen sometime, I suppose...
The DP model looks good, but
>there is very little opportunity to personalize it.
Exactly.
Perhaps GW plans
>on releasing some parts to customize.
That would be nice, certainly.
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
<qr...@san.rr.yourhead.com> writes:
>Have you seen the heavy bolter model in person? He's got girl wrists
>and looks awkward.
I haven't - from the photos, though, the only problem seems to be the
apparently low level of detail on the weapon itself.
Philip Bowles
the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King
> "P Bowles" <pbo...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20021123043900...@mb-cj.aol.com...
>
>>In article <arni18$i0c$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, "DJ Jizzy Bear"
>><keepin...@homeboys.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>>Give them terminator honours and you've got a very nice unit, and
>>>
> really
>
>>>>expensive, maybe not as much as a Thousand Son Chaos Lord with full
>>>>retinue of sorcerers, but expensive nonetheless.
>>>
>>>See above.
>>
>>What, "<snip>"?
>
>
> It was a hint for Sam.
>
--
the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King
Mikael
> writes:
>
> >> >Don't forget Tomb Kings of Norway.
> >>
> >> My brain shut down after considering the Wood Finns.
> >
> >Don't worry, our lot were never Vikings. Some hitch-hiked along, though,
> >so maybe Regiments of Finns as rare choices?
>
> Don't forget the enemies of the Vikings are included. The English get to use
> Fenbeasts, or as they are now known, Bogs of War.
=)
> > but I'd like to be
> >> able to relate to major characters, or at least have some idea whether they
> >> have a personality.
> >
> >Well, yes. Then again, this is always a problem with GW fluff...
>
> Never mind fluff, it's a problem with GW writers...
I'm _well_ aware of that... Some of the older 40K / SM fluff was very
good, at least compared to the newer stuff, and I sort of live in a make-
believe world where everything is the way it was in SM2. It keeps me sane
when buying minis.
> >> >> The only drawback associated with this and a few other upgrades, most
> >> >notably a
> >> >> command squad with jump pack and lightning claw options for its members,
> >> >
> >> >Crikey. How much are the LCs?
> >>
> >> 30pts per model, but only available to command models with jump packs.
> >
> >So, a Command squad trooper with a pair of lightning claws would cost
> >what? 70 points?
>
> *shrug* Something like that.
Hello, HQ rumble. I'm going to work on this Chapter...
> >> As presented here, the vampire fluff does actually make sense
> >> (except for the Blood Dragons, who just flee and are never mentioned again)
> >and
> >> does add to the story - the Strigoi fellow expands on the brief 4th Ed.
> >mention
> >> of the Ghoul King,
> >
> >This is the same stuff as in the Vampire Counts army book, I presume?
>
> Yes, though truncated.
Nice of them to finally do a proper fluff feature. Maybe they'd let me
write some of their fluff for once...
> >> I
> >> just wish the army wasn't presented in the way it was - back in 4th
> >Edition,
> >> every component of an Undead army and its relationship to Nagash (and
> >therefore
> >> necromancers in general) was explained - the tribes that became the Ghouls,
> >the
> >> Wights raised from their barrows, the vampires learning from Nagash's
> >books,
> >> all of it.
> >
> >I do remember. It was excellent. See, I can rationalize playing Vampire
> >Counts by using the old fluff.
>
> Or just use a Necromancer as the army general.
I'm seriously considering it. My megalomaniac WFB plan is to eventually
assemble a 10,000 point army, made up of four smaller armies (CD, VC, DE,
DoW), and I can make the fluff hang together if the VC army is commmanded
by a Necromancer.
> >> With the Vampires in charge, you just have a bunch of B-movie
> >> monsters thrown together - as I've said numerous times, Munsters.
> >> The Undead
> >> list needed to be split, and the Tomb Kings have gained huge fluff benefits
> >(oh
> >> yes, and Ushabti), but the Vampires are the wrong army.
> >
> >Not at all. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the Vampire Counts
> >concept, and if you take a moment to read the Bestiary section of the VC
> >book, you'll find that it's _not_ "a bunch of B-movie monsters", far from
> >it.
>
> Zombies, skellies, ghouls, monster bats that look as convincing as the rubber
> models in low-budget Dracula clones, wolves, vampires inspired by film
> temptresses and Bram Stoker.
And the other WFB armies are _less_ stereotypical??
> No werewolves or Frankenstein's monster, but those
> are the only stereotypes missing. The Strigoi go a little way to giving the
> newer fluff more depth, but not far enough.
The Undead fluff has remarkable depth; I consider it some of the best WFB
fluff there is.
> > Sure, the Tomb Kings gained a lot of fluff, which is excellent, but
> >IMHO their list seems to be a "The Mummy Returns!" style undead +
> >monsters kitbash.
>
> Too many monsters, certainly, but it's kept the original theme of the 4th Ed.
> Undead and created an army style which is more coherent and inventive.
This is mostly a matter of taste.
> The VC list is coherent and very fluffy.
Your reader doesn't seem to quote properly; I said the above, but it
shows up as part of your message.
> I'd disagree on both counts, the latter especially. For coherency - well,
> everything is a close combat troop of some variety, if that counts.
You can't claim the Tomb Kings are any better in this respect. Very few
WFB armies are versatile at all.
> On the
> other hand, the zombie/skeleton distinction is all but redundant with the two
> units having similar points values and similar profiles - a single regiment
> with a 40-model maximum (the Khemri approach) makes more intuitive sense.
You're unaware of the Zombie special rule of always striking last, and
the differences in equipment?
> The
> army relies too much on underpriced special units and not enough on its grunts.
> Ghouls are handled well, but that's about it.
Underpriced special units like? My VC army relies on Ghouls...
> >> There should be a TK list and a Necromancer list. Distinguish the vampires
> >by
> >> all means, at least in fluff, but keep them in the appropriate places - the
> >> Necrarchs in the remnants of Lahmia, the Lahmians as refugees scattered
> >around
> >> the world, the Strigoi as Old World itinerants and of course the von
> >Carsteins
> >> in the Dracula role.
> >
> >How is this different from the current VC concept?
>
> The current VC concept is that Sylvania is a retirement home for all manner of
> ghosties and ghoulies.
Um, no, it most certainly is _not_. Only the von Carsteins are connected
to Sylvania.
> I can just picture a zombie reminiscing "I was in Night
> of the Living Dead, you know" or "Things were so much better when I was
> alive..." It completely ruined the menace and the brooding atmosphere of the
> real vC (von Carstein) Sylvania background. Now the place is crawling with
> vampires of every stereotype imaginable. It's another credit to Alessio that
> his vampires, the Strigoi, are the only ones who aren't based in Sylvania.
At this point I have to ask: have you actually read the army book??? The
Necrarchs, Blood Dragons and Lahmians have absolutely nothing to do with
Sylvania!
> And why only a Tomb
> >King and Necromancer list? What happened to the von Carstein invasions,
> >then?
>
> There's no reason you couldn't have a vampire-led Necromancer army; after all,
> you can have VC armies led by Necromancers or TK armies led by Liche Priests if
> you so desire. But these are the exception rather than the norm, and what's
> more von Carstein invasions tend to be led by a von Carstein - just as in 4th
> Ed., you can represent them by using a normal army led by a vC special
> character.
True, but why do you insist it has to be a Necromancer list? Personally,
I'd be a lot happier if there was one coherent Undead army book that
could be used to make Tomb King, Vampire and Necromancer armies. Why are
Liches suddenly solely found in Khemri, for example?
> But it makes a lot more sense and is in line with older fluff for
> Necromancers to control armies of the Undead rather than vampires, with whom
> magic-using has always been a relatively minor talent in any case. Necromancers
> also have a habit of popping up anywhere; with the vampires confined to
> Sylvania it is hard to suspend belief when all the Wights from the north and
> Ghouls from the rest of the world find themselves gravitating to this one small
> backwater.
Again, the Vampires are _not_ confined to Sylvania. I do wish you'd read
the fluff before you denigrate it!
> >> Oh, and ditch the Blood Dragons.
> >
> >Why? It's a new take on Vampires, and god knows we haven't seen that for
> >nearly a century.
>
> Hardly new - vampires have always been portrayed as powerful fighters and noble
> figures; a Blood Dragon just happens to be one on a horse. I would like to
> think that the Blood Dragons are an allusion to Vlad Drakul's history as a
> member of the knightly Order of the Dragon, but I don't credit the chimps with
> that much thought. They just wanted another armoured bonehead of the sort who
> leads most of the other armies. In the context of the fluff, the fact that the
> Blood Dragons are vampires is almost an irrelevance - they're just another
> breed of knight.
<profound sigh> So, you've never seen the Blood Dragon fluff in the
Vampire Counts army book?
<snip>
> > Admirable considering he works for GW.
>
> It's only the English who are dullards...
Unfortunately, this seems to be true... BTW, I hear Tuomas Pirinen is off
designing some silly console games.
--
Mikael
--
"The University is the fountain of knowledge,
and the students are here to drink."
RGMW FAQ and stuff at http://www.rgmw.org
Mikael
have us believe that:
> I still can't understand people
> calling the Monolith cheese, considering its overall effect on any
> given battle.
Personally, I have an issue with the Living Metal rule, which seems to be
a living example (pun intended) of Codex creep. This special rule
overrides all other special rules... Right.
St. Jason
>
>Thanks. Though if he let me write the rest of the magazine, there wouldn't be
>a
>need for editorials like mine...
Good god! They might actually have some *editing* done! They might have a
fact-checking done! They might even cover up the fact that most of the studio
doesn't know jack about their own rules! So you will never get hired...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _<The bottom line> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
St. Jason
Blank Dave can't possibly build a bigger form flame...
"All Hail The KING of Bullshit, The One and Only St. Jason
May he continue to churm it out for many years to come." -Geoff
P Bowles
writes:
>In article <20021122183618...@mb-dh.aol.com>, pbo...@aol.com
>would have us believe that:
>> In article <MPG.18489d779...@news.inet.fi>, Mikael
><mik...@ci5.gov>
>> writes:
>> > but I'd like to be
>> >> able to relate to major characters, or at least have some idea whether
>they
>> >> have a personality.
>> >
>> >Well, yes. Then again, this is always a problem with GW fluff...
>>
>> Never mind fluff, it's a problem with GW writers...
>
>I'm _well_ aware of that... Some of the older 40K / SM fluff was very
>good, at least compared to the newer stuff, and I sort of live in a make-
>believe world where everything is the way it was in SM2.
Well, other than the rules...
It keeps me sane
>when buying minis.
But isn't much help when it comes to buying WFB minis, I'm guessing.
>> >> As presented here, the vampire fluff does actually make sense
>> >> (except for the Blood Dragons, who just flee and are never mentioned
>again)
>> >and
>> >> does add to the story - the Strigoi fellow expands on the brief 4th Ed.
>> >mention
>> >> of the Ghoul King,
>> >
>> >This is the same stuff as in the Vampire Counts army book, I presume?
>>
>> Yes, though truncated.
>
>Nice of them to finally do a proper fluff feature. Maybe they'd let me
>write some of their fluff for once...
They haven't got back to me about my suggestions ages ago, but then those were
for races which weren't due to be heavily-featured at the time. Still, I can
certainly turn my hand to WFB fluff and I wouldn't mind giving it a try.
>> >I do remember. It was excellent. See, I can rationalize playing Vampire
>> >Counts by using the old fluff.
>>
>> Or just use a Necromancer as the army general.
>
>I'm seriously considering it. My megalomaniac WFB plan is to eventually
>assemble a 10,000 point army, made up of four smaller armies (CD, VC, DE,
>DoW), and I can make the fluff hang together if the VC army is commmanded
>by a Necromancer.
Seems an odd combination - though I did always wonder: with their constant need
for slaves and dirty, toxic conditions, why the hell don't the Chaos Dwarfs
learn necromancy and create skeletons to do all the work? It'd save everyone a
lot of bother.
>> Zombies, skellies, ghouls, monster bats that look as convincing as the
>rubber
>> models in low-budget Dracula clones, wolves, vampires inspired by film
>> temptresses and Bram Stoker.
>
>And the other WFB armies are _less_ stereotypical??
Well, they tend to be slightly higher-class rip-offs. :-) To their credit, the
Tomb Kings have no pyramids in sight and some effort has gone into creating
Egyptian-style weapons and shields, rather than just settling for the
stereotypes of headdresses and bandages (although they are there as well). As
for other armies, some of the historically-inspired ones are derived from
periods rarely visited by other fantasy (Empire, Chaos Dwarfs) and a few others
betray a depth that suggests research beyond the usual stereotype (I'm thinking
Lizards, here). There are lapses, of course - Beastmen, Bretonnians, Vampire
Counts - but fewer than the successes IMO.
>> No werewolves or Frankenstein's monster, but those
>> are the only stereotypes missing. The Strigoi go a little way to giving the
>> newer fluff more depth, but not far enough.
>
>The Undead fluff has remarkable depth; I consider it some of the best WFB
>fluff there is.
The Undead fluff, by and large, is the Khemri fluff. Even in 4th Ed. the
vampires only got a couple of pages.
>> > Sure, the Tomb Kings gained a lot of fluff, which is excellent, but
>> >IMHO their list seems to be a "The Mummy Returns!" style undead +
>> >monsters kitbash.
>>
>> Too many monsters, certainly, but it's kept the original theme of the 4th
>Ed.
>> Undead and created an army style which is more coherent and inventive.
>
>This is mostly a matter of taste.
Maybe, but other than magic reliance and fear I can't think of any real
unifying feature in the Undead army of years gone by. With the Tomb Kings, you
have an army more closely (though still loosely) based on a historical force,
the magic is less potent but more focused towards enhancement rather than being
good at everything, and it is designed to allow themed armies - cavalry/chariot
forces, defensive firepower forces or monster assault forces. The approach to
magic is novel, and the handling of chariot formations equally so.
>> The VC list is coherent and very fluffy.
>
>Your reader doesn't seem to quote properly; I said the above, but it
>shows up as part of your message.
>
>> I'd disagree on both counts, the latter especially. For coherency - well,
>> everything is a close combat troop of some variety, if that counts.
>
>You can't claim the Tomb Kings are any better in this respect. Very few
>WFB armies are versatile at all.
You can't deny that Khemri is more versatile than the Munsters - they have
missile fire in abundance for Core units, they have artillery, and they have
wider (and cheaper) access to cavalry than the Vampires.
>> On the
>> other hand, the zombie/skeleton distinction is all but redundant with the
>two
>> units having similar points values and similar profiles - a single regiment
>> with a 40-model maximum (the Khemri approach) makes more intuitive sense.
>
>You're unaware of the Zombie special rule of always striking last, and
>the differences in equipment?
No, but neither would be a great loss if one went the Khemrian route - skellies
almost always strike last after the charge so that's a virtual irrelevance, and
zombies don't have equipment options full stop. At the same time they aren't
cheap enough compared with skellies to compensate for even minor drawbacks, so
why not a single 40-strong unit with skellie equipment options?
>> The
>> army relies too much on underpriced special units and not enough on its
>grunts.
>> Ghouls are handled well, but that's about it.
>
>Underpriced special units like? My VC army relies on Ghouls...
Wights of both flavours - not underpriced by more than a point or two, but a
bargain compared with skellies or zombies, which is why the standard
non-Necrarch set up for a vC army seems to be a few Ghouls for Core
requirements and a lot of Wights.
>> I can just picture a zombie reminiscing "I was in Night
>> of the Living Dead, you know" or "Things were so much better when I was
>> alive..." It completely ruined the menace and the brooding atmosphere of
>the
>> real vC (von Carstein) Sylvania background. Now the place is crawling with
>> vampires of every stereotype imaginable. It's another credit to Alessio
>that
>> his vampires, the Strigoi, are the only ones who aren't based in Sylvania.
>
>At this point I have to ask: have you actually read the army book??? The
>Necrarchs, Blood Dragons and Lahmians have absolutely nothing to do with
>Sylvania!
From what I recall of the fluff released in WD with the 5th Ed. release, the
vampires of all lineages gravitated towards Sylvania after they became refugees
from Lahmia, not just the von Carsteins. And I still don't know what bloodline
Drachenfels belongs to...
>> And why only a Tomb
>> >King and Necromancer list? What happened to the von Carstein invasions,
>> >then?
>>
>> There's no reason you couldn't have a vampire-led Necromancer army; after
>all,
>> you can have VC armies led by Necromancers or TK armies led by Liche
>Priests if
>> you so desire. But these are the exception rather than the norm, and what's
>> more von Carstein invasions tend to be led by a von Carstein - just as in
>4th
>> Ed., you can represent them by using a normal army led by a vC special
>> character.
>
>True, but why do you insist it has to be a Necromancer list?
Partly for consistency with the original Undead fluff, including the return of
Nagash which appears to have been completely forgotten in the current
storyline, and partly because by and large, Old World Undead armies *are* the
creation of Necromancers. That, after all, is their raison d'etre - a vampire
is still a vampire whether or not he has his B-movie army, but a Necromancer
who doesn't raise the dead isn't much of a Necromancer. I find it easier to
credit the idea that a vampire will join a Necromancer-led army than the idea
that every Necromancer in the Warhammer World needs a vampiric patron.
Personally,
>I'd be a lot happier if there was one coherent Undead army book that
>could be used to make Tomb King, Vampire and Necromancer armies. Why are
>Liches suddenly solely found in Khemri, for example?
Why are wraiths and necromancers suddenly not found in Khemri? The original
Undead book was a mishmash of Undead from across the Warhammer World - some,
like mummies and most Liches, were Khemrian in origin while others like wights
and ghouls are mostly found in the Old World (leaving aside for the moment the
fact that the original ghoul tribes were from the Southlands).
In the old days, a Liche had an identical profile to a Necromancer, and indeed
the Lichemaster is still a VC special character. If the relocation of Liche
*Priests* to Khemri bothers you, just assume that one or more of your
Necromancers is an Old World Liche.
>> >> Oh, and ditch the Blood Dragons.
>> >
>> >Why? It's a new take on Vampires, and god knows we haven't seen that for
>> >nearly a century.
>>
>> Hardly new - vampires have always been portrayed as powerful fighters and
>noble
>> figures; a Blood Dragon just happens to be one on a horse. I would like to
>> think that the Blood Dragons are an allusion to Vlad Drakul's history as a
>> member of the knightly Order of the Dragon, but I don't credit the chimps
>with
>> that much thought. They just wanted another armoured bonehead of the sort
>who
>> leads most of the other armies. In the context of the fluff, the fact that
>the
>> Blood Dragons are vampires is almost an irrelevance - they're just another
>> breed of knight.
>
><profound sigh> So, you've never seen the Blood Dragon fluff in the
>Vampire Counts army book?
I've seen the BD fluff printed in White Dwarf in both 5th and 6th Ed. Didn't
stick in the mind too well, but I can't recall any fundamental differences in
ethos between Blood Dragons and human Knights.
><snip>
>> > Admirable considering he works for GW.
>>
>> It's only the English who are dullards...
>
>Unfortunately, this seems to be true... BTW, I hear Tuomas Pirinen is off
>designing some silly console games.
Pity. At the very least, Mordheim would probably have benefited a fair bit if
he'd done a spell with Fanatic.
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
black...@aol.com.is.evil (St. Jason) writes:
>>>You rock. Fatso should get you in to do the editorials.
>>
>>Thanks. Though if he let me write the rest of the magazine, there wouldn't
>be
>>a
>>need for editorials like mine...
>
>Good god! They might actually have some *editing* done! They might have a
>fact-checking done! They might even cover up the fact that most of the studio
>doesn't know jack about their own rules! So you will never get hired...
I've thought about that. There are two major stumbling blocks to my prospective
future with White Dwarf - I have editorial experience and I have talent. Oh,
yes, and I'd expect my salary in money, not bananas.
Philip Bowles
Robert Singers
> I've thought about that. There are two major stumbling blocks to my
prospective
> future with White Dwarf - I have editorial experience and I have talent. Oh,
> yes, and I'd expect my salary in money, not bananas.
Ook
Mikael
> In article <MPG.184b76a32...@news.inet.fi>, Mikael <mik...@ci5.gov>
> writes:
>
> >In article <20021122183618...@mb-dh.aol.com>, pbo...@aol.com
> >would have us believe that:
> >> In article <MPG.18489d779...@news.inet.fi>, Mikael
> ><mik...@ci5.gov>
> >> writes:
>
> >> > but I'd like to be
> >> >> able to relate to major characters, or at least have some idea whether
> >they
> >> >> have a personality.
> >> >
> >> >Well, yes. Then again, this is always a problem with GW fluff...
> >>
> >> Never mind fluff, it's a problem with GW writers...
> >
> >I'm _well_ aware of that... Some of the older 40K / SM fluff was very
> >good, at least compared to the newer stuff, and I sort of live in a make-
> >believe world where everything is the way it was in SM2.
>
> Well, other than the rules...
I _was_ talking about fluff.
> > It keeps me sane
> >when buying minis.
>
> But isn't much help when it comes to buying WFB minis, I'm guessing.
Not really. I tend to completely disregard most of the WHFB fluff anyway,
and play the game as "general fantasy".
> >Nice of them to finally do a proper fluff feature. Maybe they'd let me
> >write some of their fluff for once...
>
> They haven't got back to me about my suggestions ages ago, but then those were
> for races which weren't due to be heavily-featured at the time. Still, I can
> certainly turn my hand to WFB fluff and I wouldn't mind giving it a try.
I've been considering it. If you see any Warhammer novels written with a
funny, CI5-related pseudonym in a year's time or so, well, don't say I
didn't warn you... =)
> >I'm seriously considering it. My megalomaniac WFB plan is to eventually
> >assemble a 10,000 point army, made up of four smaller armies (CD, VC, DE,
> >DoW), and I can make the fluff hang together if the VC army is commmanded
> >by a Necromancer.
>
> Seems an odd combination
It's supposed to be a 3v1l force of sorts. Led by a Chaos Dwarf Sorcerer
Lord, who has banded together with a Necromancer and a raiding party of
DE. I'll probably be using DoW for my evil humans, since Chaos doesn't
really work for me...
> - though I did always wonder: with their constant need
> for slaves and dirty, toxic conditions, why the hell don't the Chaos Dwarfs
> learn necromancy and create skeletons to do all the work? It'd save everyone a
> lot of bother.
I have no idea. Maybe Chaos Dwarfs aren't into Dark Magic as such, or
they don't want to be linked to Nagash? Endless speculation ensues...
Besides, maybe enslaving Goblin tribes is easier.
> >> Zombies, skellies, ghouls, monster bats that look as convincing as the
> >rubber
> >> models in low-budget Dracula clones, wolves, vampires inspired by film
> >> temptresses and Bram Stoker.
> >
> >And the other WFB armies are _less_ stereotypical??
>
> Well, they tend to be slightly higher-class rip-offs. :-) To their credit, the
> Tomb Kings have no pyramids in sight and some effort has gone into creating
> Egyptian-style weapons and shields, rather than just settling for the
> stereotypes of headdresses and bandages (although they are there as well).
Yes, I appreciate the effort.
> As
> for other armies, some of the historically-inspired ones are derived from
> periods rarely visited by other fantasy (Empire, Chaos Dwarfs) and a few others
> betray a depth that suggests research beyond the usual stereotype (I'm thinking
> Lizards, here). There are lapses, of course - Beastmen, Bretonnians, Vampire
> Counts - but fewer than the successes IMO.
I think WFB is successful at being a sort of generic fantasy game, but
that does involve a large amount of ripoffs by definition... I've always
thought the Empire and DoW lists are a bit funny historically, though;
pikes are a stretch on a WFB battlefield, and they haven't got quite the
murderous effect on cavalry pikes ought to have.
> >> No werewolves or Frankenstein's monster, but those
> >> are the only stereotypes missing. The Strigoi go a little way to giving the
> >> newer fluff more depth, but not far enough.
> >
> >The Undead fluff has remarkable depth; I consider it some of the best WFB
> >fluff there is.
>
> The Undead fluff, by and large, is the Khemri fluff. Even in 4th Ed. the
> vampires only got a couple of pages.
To be honest, it's all Nagash fluff in 4th ed. The Vampires are
intimately connected with it, since it details their creation and role in
Nagash's wars against Khemri. While the Nagash-Khemri war dominates some
of the Undead fluff, saying that all Undead fluff is Khemri fluff is like
saying all Empire and Dwarf fluff is just Orc fluff.
> >> Too many monsters, certainly, but it's kept the original theme of the 4th
> >Ed.
> >> Undead and created an army style which is more coherent and inventive.
> >
> >This is mostly a matter of taste.
>
> Maybe, but other than magic reliance and fear I can't think of any real
> unifying feature in the Undead army of years gone by. With the Tomb Kings, you
> have an army more closely (though still loosely) based on a historical force,
> the magic is less potent but more focused towards enhancement rather than being
> good at everything, and it is designed to allow themed armies - cavalry/chariot
> forces, defensive firepower forces or monster assault forces. The approach to
> magic is novel, and the handling of chariot formations equally so.
I always thought the point of the Vampire Counts list was to be able to
create a sort of undead Empire army, with foot troopers (Skeletons),
knights (Wights of both shades) and skirmishers (Ghouls). Although all
kinds of silly ideas like armies with huge loads of Wolves and ghosts are
possible, the basic outline of a VC army is eminently sensible. It's also
very much like the old 4th ed. Undead armies.
> >> I'd disagree on both counts, the latter especially. For coherency - well,
> >> everything is a close combat troop of some variety, if that counts.
> >
> >You can't claim the Tomb Kings are any better in this respect. Very few
> >WFB armies are versatile at all.
>
> You can't deny that Khemri is more versatile than the Munsters - they have
> missile fire in abundance for Core units, they have artillery, and they have
> wider (and cheaper) access to cavalry than the Vampires.
The last point is patently untrue if one accepts Dire Wolves as cavalry.
And I still doubt whether a Khemri force could make a viable shooty list.
> >> On the
> >> other hand, the zombie/skeleton distinction is all but redundant with the
> >two
> >> units having similar points values and similar profiles - a single regiment
> >> with a 40-model maximum (the Khemri approach) makes more intuitive sense.
> >
> >You're unaware of the Zombie special rule of always striking last, and
> >the differences in equipment?
>
> No, but neither would be a great loss if one went the Khemrian route - skellies
> almost always strike last after the charge so that's a virtual irrelevance, and
> zombies don't have equipment options full stop. At the same time they aren't
> cheap enough compared with skellies to compensate for even minor drawbacks, so
> why not a single 40-strong unit with skellie equipment options?
This is pure sophistry. One of the most significant differences between
Zombies and Skeletons is in the Invocation of Nehek, which lets you top
up Zombie units at an alarming rate, or summon viably sized ones from
scratch. That difference alone justifies the separate units.
> >> The
> >> army relies too much on underpriced special units and not enough on its
> >grunts.
> >> Ghouls are handled well, but that's about it.
> >
> >Underpriced special units like? My VC army relies on Ghouls...
>
> Wights of both flavours - not underpriced by more than a point or two, but a
> bargain compared with skellies or zombies, which is why the standard
> non-Necrarch set up for a vC army seems to be a few Ghouls for Core
> requirements and a lot of Wights.
If some players use a list to make silly armies, it's hardly a
condemnation of the whole list. The most amazing crap can be put together
with the basic Space Marine list in 40K, yet it isn't by any means a bad
list.
> >> I can just picture a zombie reminiscing "I was in Night
> >> of the Living Dead, you know" or "Things were so much better when I was
> >> alive..." It completely ruined the menace and the brooding atmosphere of
> >the
> >> real vC (von Carstein) Sylvania background. Now the place is crawling with
> >> vampires of every stereotype imaginable. It's another credit to Alessio
> >that
> >> his vampires, the Strigoi, are the only ones who aren't based in Sylvania.
> >
> >At this point I have to ask: have you actually read the army book??? The
> >Necrarchs, Blood Dragons and Lahmians have absolutely nothing to do with
> >Sylvania!
>
> From what I recall of the fluff released in WD with the 5th Ed. release, the
> vampires of all lineages gravitated towards Sylvania after they became refugees
> from Lahmia, not just the von Carsteins.
This is definitely untrue in 6th ed.
> And I still don't know what bloodline
> Drachenfels belongs to...
Neither do I...
> >> There's no reason you couldn't have a vampire-led Necromancer army; after
> >all,
> >> you can have VC armies led by Necromancers or TK armies led by Liche
> >Priests if
> >> you so desire. But these are the exception rather than the norm, and what's
> >> more von Carstein invasions tend to be led by a von Carstein - just as in
> >4th
> >> Ed., you can represent them by using a normal army led by a vC special
> >> character.
> >
> >True, but why do you insist it has to be a Necromancer list?
>
> Partly for consistency with the original Undead fluff, including the return of
> Nagash which appears to have been completely forgotten in the current
> storyline,
Tell me about it...
> and partly because by and large, Old World Undead armies *are* the
> creation of Necromancers. That, after all, is their raison d'etre - a vampire
> is still a vampire whether or not he has his B-movie army, but a Necromancer
> who doesn't raise the dead isn't much of a Necromancer. I find it easier to
> credit the idea that a vampire will join a Necromancer-led army than the idea
> that every Necromancer in the Warhammer World needs a vampiric patron.
I still vote for a single Undead book to resolve the differences.
> Personally,
> >I'd be a lot happier if there was one coherent Undead army book that
> >could be used to make Tomb King, Vampire and Necromancer armies. Why are
> >Liches suddenly solely found in Khemri, for example?
>
> Why are wraiths and necromancers suddenly not found in Khemri? The original
> Undead book was a mishmash of Undead from across the Warhammer World - some,
> like mummies and most Liches, were Khemrian in origin while others like wights
> and ghouls are mostly found in the Old World (leaving aside for the moment the
> fact that the original ghoul tribes were from the Southlands).
I still vote for a single Undead book to resolve the differences.
> In the old days, a Liche had an identical profile to a Necromancer, and indeed
> the Lichemaster is still a VC special character. If the relocation of Liche
> *Priests* to Khemri bothers you, just assume that one or more of your
> Necromancers is an Old World Liche.
If you want to be pedantic, Liches weren't relocated, they vanished.
Liche Priests are a different animal. And the Lichemaster is, I believe,
still Heinrich Kemmler, who is a living, breathing Necromancer.
> >> >> Oh, and ditch the Blood Dragons.
> >> >
> >> >Why? It's a new take on Vampires, and god knows we haven't seen that for
> >> >nearly a century.
> >>
> >> Hardly new - vampires have always been portrayed as powerful fighters and
> >noble
> >> figures; a Blood Dragon just happens to be one on a horse. I would like to
> >> think that the Blood Dragons are an allusion to Vlad Drakul's history as a
> >> member of the knightly Order of the Dragon, but I don't credit the chimps
> >with
> >> that much thought. They just wanted another armoured bonehead of the sort
> >who
> >> leads most of the other armies. In the context of the fluff, the fact that
> >the
> >> Blood Dragons are vampires is almost an irrelevance - they're just another
> >> breed of knight.
> >
> ><profound sigh> So, you've never seen the Blood Dragon fluff in the
> >Vampire Counts army book?
>
> I've seen the BD fluff printed in White Dwarf in both 5th and 6th Ed. Didn't
> stick in the mind too well, but I can't recall any fundamental differences in
> ethos between Blood Dragons and human Knights.
Then I'll advise you to re-read it, since there is a very fundamental
difference. The two have very little to do with each other.
<snip>
> >> > Admirable considering he works for GW.
> >>
> >> It's only the English who are dullards...
> >
> >Unfortunately, this seems to be true... BTW, I hear Tuomas Pirinen is off
> >designing some silly console games.
>
> Pity. At the very least, Mordheim would probably have benefited a fair bit if
> he'd done a spell with Fanatic.
Did he give any reason for leaving GW?
incrdbil
>
>I've thought about that. There are two major stumbling blocks to my prospective
>future with White Dwarf - I have editorial experience and I have talent. Oh,
>yes, and I'd expect my salary in money, not bananas.
>
>Philip Bowles
Well, heck, what prestige is there in editing a catalog anyway? That
is what WD is closer to anyway.
Erik Setzer
>> I still can't understand people
>> calling the Monolith cheese, considering its overall effect on any
>> given battle.
>
>Personally, I have an issue with the Living Metal rule, which seems to be
>a living example (pun intended) of Codex creep. This special rule
>overrides all other special rules... Right.
*Except* Ordnance. And don't forget that it's a skimmer that isn't
destroyed when immobilized.
-Erik
The Blue Raja
<snip>
> I can just picture a zombie reminiscing "I was in Night
> of the Living Dead, you know" or "Things were so much better when I was
> alive..."
Or "I was working in the lab, late one night...".
--
The Blue Raja
"AOL: You feel ripped off even if you aren't paying!" -St Jason
RGMW FAQ - Is FAQ, is good
http://rgmw.b3p0.com/rgmw/rgmw-faq.html
DJ Jizzy Bear
"incrdbil" <incr...@flinthills.com> wrote in message
news:3de189e4....@usenet.flinthills.com...
Done well, I still believe WD could be an excellent journal. After all,
there has to be something of value in the whole thing, otherwise why do so
many of us spend our time yakking about it? The more I see of Sawyer, the
less I am impressed with him.
Mikael
>
> news:3de189e4....@usenet.flinthills.com...
> > On 24 Nov 2002 23:44:02 GMT, pbo...@aol.com (P Bowles) wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >I've thought about that. There are two major stumbling blocks to my
> prospective
> > >future with White Dwarf - I have editorial experience and I have talent.
> Oh,
> > >yes, and I'd expect my salary in money, not bananas.
> > >
> > >Philip Bowles
> >
> > Well, heck, what prestige is there in editing a catalog anyway? That
> > is what WD is closer to anyway.
>
> Done well, I still believe WD could be an excellent journal. After all,
> there has to be something of value in the whole thing, otherwise why do so
> many of us spend our time yakking about it?
Excellent point. It's the same as WHFB, 40k, Necromunda and the Epic
games; we all bitch and gripe about them constantly, yet we all play and
collect them. The games, in fact the entire GW universe, has immense
potential, but so much of it is mismanaged...
> The more I see of Sawyer, the
> less I am impressed with him.
Being sensible for a moment, I have to admit that I don't know how much
GW's problems can be incarnated into specific people like Sawyer or
Thorpe. I'm thinking there's a company-wide problem, in that they're
either focusing on the wrong end of the market from our POV (easily
impressionable kids), or not focusing on anything at all.
DJ Jizzy Bear
"Mikael" <mik...@ci5.gov> wrote in message
news:MPG.184c1104d...@news.inet.fi...
> In article <arsn4e$khc$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>, keepin...@homeboys.com
> would have us believe that:
> >
> > "incrdbil" <incr...@flinthills.com> wrote in message
> > news:3de189e4....@usenet.flinthills.com...
> > > On 24 Nov 2002 23:44:02 GMT, pbo...@aol.com (P Bowles) wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >I've thought about that. There are two major stumbling blocks to my
> > prospective
> > > >future with White Dwarf - I have editorial experience and I have
talent.
> > Oh,
> > > >yes, and I'd expect my salary in money, not bananas.
> > > >
> > > >Philip Bowles
> > >
> > > Well, heck, what prestige is there in editing a catalog anyway? That
> > > is what WD is closer to anyway.
> >
> > Done well, I still believe WD could be an excellent journal. After all,
> > there has to be something of value in the whole thing, otherwise why do
so
> > many of us spend our time yakking about it?
>
> Excellent point. It's the same as WHFB, 40k, Necromunda and the Epic
> games; we all bitch and gripe about them constantly, yet we all play and
> collect them. The games, in fact the entire GW universe, has immense
> potential, but so much of it is mismanaged...
Absolutely. They are moderately successful as a big business, but from the
point of view of wargaming as a hobby (not *the* Hobby) they are not quite
so impressive.
>
> > The more I see of Sawyer, the
> > less I am impressed with him.
>
> Being sensible for a moment, I have to admit that I don't know how much
> GW's problems can be incarnated into specific people like Sawyer or
> Thorpe. I'm thinking there's a company-wide problem, in that they're
> either focusing on the wrong end of the market from our POV (easily
> impressionable kids), or not focusing on anything at all.
That's the longest running criticism, of course. Certainly WD is not written
for adults. It's puerile, condescending and poorly written, to a standard
which would cause its demise were it in a competitive market, and I rather
think it's this lack of competition that has given GW the perceived right to
sit on its arse and lower its standards.
St. Jason
>> is what WD is closer to anyway.
>
>Done well, I still believe WD could be an excellent journal. After all,
>there has to be something of value in the whole thing, otherwise why do so
>many of us spend our time yakking about it? The more I see of Sawyer, the
>less I am impressed with him.
This has gotten me thinking. If you were in charge of White Dwarf, what would
you do?
Keep in mind that this is an in-house "mag", so no outside advertising. Also
the focus must be maintained upon GW stuff to the point of myopia....
That said, here is my idea: Divide each issue into four sections (perhaps
five... read on..) A definate section for Fantasy. A definate section for 40k.
A switching section for whatever the flavor of the month is... New releases,
LOTR, Fanatic, etc. Finally, five pages showing just the bits and sprues. This
last issue with the couple of catalog pages at the back made me realize how
much I missed that. Not the lame colorized ones, just simply lay out the bits
and all the varieties of that type, like the old catalogs....
So, for example, if WD # 280 (under the command of St. Jason) was 32 pages,
then the layout would be...
1-2 pages for "business"... new releases, announcements, and if any space is
left, an editorial.
8 pages of "rotational". Say a four-page spread to the new Blood Bowl set
coming out, and maybe a page dedicated to LOTR.
7-9 pages of Fantasy Battles (perhaps dip into Warmaster if things are slow?)
new rules, fluff, whatever.
7-9 pages of 40k. (perhaps dipping into BFG and/or Epic40k?) new rules, fluff,
IA, etc.
That leaves ~8 pages for ads (buffering the sections/articles perhaps) and the
catalog section. If we put a page of ads between each section, that's 4 pages
of ads, leaving 4 pages for catalog sections.
*I* would think about a subscription again if that format started appearing...
DJ Jizzy Bear
"St. Jason" <black...@aol.com.is.evil> wrote in message
news:20021125044732...@mb-bd.aol.com...
The major things I'd change are the quality of the written content and the
attitude towards gamers. No more of this GW Hobby shit. Recognise there's a
wider world out there. No more Space McQuirk and friends. No more
inconsistent and poorly conceived 'they fought each other for 3 whole days'
sort of nonsense. And I'd push hard for a rapid expansion. how much stuff
does GW produce, book-wise? take a look at what Mongoose release and you'll
see that the implication that it takes them such a long time to produce
anything is garbage. They can't even fall back on a 'quality over quantity'
argument. By now the entire Warhammer World should be mapped out with
armies. Fuck release schedules to coincide with figure ranges. Do Araby and
tell the readers that Gripping Beast do really excellent figures which will
tie in with no trouble. Sure, they'll take an initial hit on profits, except
that they'll discover this thing called 'Good Will'...
DJ Jizzy Bear
"St. Jason" <black...@aol.com.is.evil> wrote in message
news:20021125044732...@mb-bd.aol.com...
The major things I'd change are the quality of the written content and the
attitude towards gamers. No more of this GW Hobby shit. Recognise there's a
wider world out there. No more Space McQuirk and friends. No more
inconsistent and poorly conceived 'they fought each other for 3 whole days'
sort of nonsense. And I'd push hard for a rapid expansion. how much stuff
does GW produce, book-wise? take a look at what Mongoose release and you'll
see that the implication that it takes them such a long time to produce
anything is garbage. They can't even fall back on a 'quality over quantity'
argument. By now the entire Warhammer World should be mapped out with
armies. Fuck release schedules to coincide with figure ranges. Do Araby and
tell the readers that Gripping Beast do really excellent figures which will
tie in with no trouble. Sure, they'll take an initial hit on profits, except
that they'll discover this thing called 'Good Will'...
--
P Bowles
black...@aol.com.is.evil (St. Jason) writes:
>That said, here is my idea: Divide each issue into four sections (perhaps
>five... read on..) A definate section for Fantasy. A definate section for
>40k.
>A switching section for whatever the flavor of the month is... New releases,
>LOTR, Fanatic, etc.
Except for the fact that these pieces are spread through the magazine, this is
what GW already attempts with CA, WC, LotR and the various bitz pages. Your
idea would give the magazine a logical format, but wouldn't help much with the
content.
And this may be the problem - White Dwarf has many of the right ideas with its
rules series, its fluff series and its sometime scenario articles. In all
fairness, there is only a certain amount of rules content that can be produced
and adequately tested in time to incorporate it into a monthly magazine. What
WD is lacking is quality of submissions for these sections - fluff is
badly-written, tactics pieces are elementary, painting/modelling articles are
of only specialist interest at the level they're presented and rules are
largely untested.
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
writes:
>In article <20021124184056...@mb-fr.aol.com>, pbo...@aol.com
>would have us believe that:
>> In article <MPG.184b76a32...@news.inet.fi>, Mikael
><mik...@ci5.gov>
>> writes:
>>
>> >In article <20021122183618...@mb-dh.aol.com>, pbo...@aol.com
>> >would have us believe that:
>> >> In article <MPG.18489d779...@news.inet.fi>, Mikael
>> ><mik...@ci5.gov>
>> >> writes:
>> >Nice of them to finally do a proper fluff feature. Maybe they'd let me
>> >write some of their fluff for once...
>>
>> They haven't got back to me about my suggestions ages ago, but then those
>were
>> for races which weren't due to be heavily-featured at the time. Still, I
>can
>> certainly turn my hand to WFB fluff and I wouldn't mind giving it a try.
>
>I've been considering it. If you see any Warhammer novels written with a
>funny, CI5-related pseudonym in a year's time or so, well, don't say I
>didn't warn you... =)
I've been seriously thinking about a Mordheim novel, and another which will
somehow involve protagonists from all three Elven nations fighting their own
battles against the Chaos incursion.
>> >I'm seriously considering it. My megalomaniac WFB plan is to eventually
>> >assemble a 10,000 point army, made up of four smaller armies (CD, VC, DE,
>> >DoW), and I can make the fluff hang together if the VC army is commmanded
>> >by a Necromancer.
>>
>> Seems an odd combination
>
>It's supposed to be a 3v1l force of sorts. Led by a Chaos Dwarf Sorcerer
>Lord, who has banded together with a Necromancer and a raiding party of
>DE.
It'd be a good subject for that novel...
I'll probably be using DoW for my evil humans, since Chaos doesn't
>really work for me...
Chaos isn't evil anymore. :-(
>> - though I did always wonder: with their constant need
>> for slaves and dirty, toxic conditions, why the hell don't the Chaos Dwarfs
>> learn necromancy and create skeletons to do all the work? It'd save
>everyone a
>> lot of bother.
>
>I have no idea. Maybe Chaos Dwarfs aren't into Dark Magic as such, or
>they don't want to be linked to Nagash?
I'm sure they could enslave a Necromancer if they needed to, or just pinch the
Crown of Sorcery...
Endless speculation ensues...
>Besides, maybe enslaving Goblin tribes is easier.
Well, it's probably more fun and gives them an excuse to fight - what more
could you ask for?
>> >> Zombies, skellies, ghouls, monster bats that look as convincing as the
>> >rubber
>> >> models in low-budget Dracula clones, wolves, vampires inspired by film
>> >> temptresses and Bram Stoker.
>> >
>> >And the other WFB armies are _less_ stereotypical??
>>
>> Well, they tend to be slightly higher-class rip-offs. :-) To their credit,
>the
>> Tomb Kings have no pyramids in sight and some effort has gone into creating
>> Egyptian-style weapons and shields, rather than just settling for the
>> stereotypes of headdresses and bandages (although they are there as well).
>
>Yes, I appreciate the effort.
For all my complaining about certain bits not going far enough (the Gothic
spears and hand weapons, for instance), so do I. It's certainly a lot closer
than GW's ever come before, and giving all these skeletons Egyptian imagery and
equipment goes a long way towards giving the range a unified feel that the
Vampire Counts don't have to the same extent.
>> As
>> for other armies, some of the historically-inspired ones are derived from
>> periods rarely visited by other fantasy (Empire, Chaos Dwarfs) and a few
>others
>> betray a depth that suggests research beyond the usual stereotype (I'm
>thinking
>> Lizards, here). There are lapses, of course - Beastmen, Bretonnians,
>Vampire
>> Counts - but fewer than the successes IMO.
>
>I think WFB is successful at being a sort of generic fantasy game, but
>that does involve a large amount of ripoffs by definition...
To me the 'ripoffs' are the appeal - a fantasy universe conjured entirely from
the writers' imagination wouldn't have the same attraction (especially given
the limits of GW writers' imaginations). It's the particular background choices
and connections that GW has made with generic fantasy races that make the GW
races - a Lizardman is just a fantasy monster, and the Mayan civilisation is
just an interesting period of Meso-American history. A Mayan Lizardman,
however, is a unique creation of GW's - having the reptiles as the good guys
goes against the grain of this genre (gggggg....), and incorporating real Maya
events into the WFB world (for instance, the fall of the Maya civilisation
through famine and environmental degradation is parallelled by the collapse of
the Lizardmen cities due to a Skaven plague). And so it is with other races,
including the humans - when GW came on the scene, a technological, Renaissance
nation as the focus of the story was an innovation, as most fantasy up to that
point had been mired in the firmly mediaeval worlds of Middle Earth clones.
I've always
>thought the Empire and DoW lists are a bit funny historically, though;
>pikes are a stretch on a WFB battlefield, and they haven't got quite the
>murderous effect on cavalry pikes ought to have.
Arguably they're too effective against infantry as well. The pike rule should
probably be something like this:
The pike is an extremely long spear, maybe 20 feet or more in length, whose
reach makes it a formidable weapon against cavalry but cumbersome to use
against infantry. Pikes are employed in tight formations where pikers can cover
one another's 'blind spots' while presenting an impenetrable wall of spikes to
cavalry.
Fight in two ranks: Despite their reach, against infantry the pike's length
makes it difficult to use from rear ranks without obstructing or being
obstructed by the weapons and soldiers in front. Therefore a pike formation is
treated as though it were armed with spears when fighting infantry.
Against larger targets (cavalry, monsters and chariots) it is easier for an
entire formation to engage the enemy. All models in a pike formation can fight
one of these units, regardless of the number of ranks or the unit's facing. In
addition, cavalry, monsters and chariots never negate a pike formation's rank
bonus when attacking from the flank or rear.
>> >> No werewolves or Frankenstein's monster, but those
>> >> are the only stereotypes missing. The Strigoi go a little way to giving
>the
>> >> newer fluff more depth, but not far enough.
>> >
>> >The Undead fluff has remarkable depth; I consider it some of the best WFB
>> >fluff there is.
>>
>> The Undead fluff, by and large, is the Khemri fluff. Even in 4th Ed. the
>> vampires only got a couple of pages.
>
>To be honest, it's all Nagash fluff in 4th ed.
And where did he come from? Which culture was he steeped in? Who did he spend
his life fighting, and which region provided the corpses he animated? Nehekhara
and Khemri. Not to mention the fact that for two of the five millenia history
of the Undead Nagash was completely inactive. True, the Khemrians weren't
involved in the Old World activities of Kemmler, Helsnicht and the von
Carsteins (though there were allusions to Settra's fleet operating around
Bretonnia), but they were a larger part of the backstory than the Vampires. The
Vampires' role in the war against Khemri was important, but not as much so as
Khemri's role in that war.
>
>I always thought the point of the Vampire Counts list was to be able to
>create a sort of undead Empire army, with foot troopers (Skeletons),
>knights (Wights of both shades) and skirmishers (Ghouls). Although all
>kinds of silly ideas like armies with huge loads of Wolves and ghosts are
>possible, the basic outline of a VC army is eminently sensible. It's also
>very much like the old 4th ed. Undead armies.
I don't recall any skirmishers in the 4th Ed. Undead rules - even Carrion
didn't skirmish back then, let alone Ghouls. And Wight Horsemen were
prohibitively expensive in those days. Skeleton footsloggers and Skeleton
cavalry were the order of the day, the latter being relatively
lightly-equipped. Backed up by catapults of course. I still see more of an
affinity with the Tomb Kings.
>> >> I'd disagree on both counts, the latter especially. For coherency -
>well,
>> >> everything is a close combat troop of some variety, if that counts.
>> >
>> >You can't claim the Tomb Kings are any better in this respect. Very few
>> >WFB armies are versatile at all.
>>
>> You can't deny that Khemri is more versatile than the Munsters - they have
>> missile fire in abundance for Core units, they have artillery, and they
>have
>> wider (and cheaper) access to cavalry than the Vampires.
>
>The last point is patently untrue if one accepts Dire Wolves as cavalry.
As far as I know, Dire Wolves aren't Core. And how expensive are they, anyway?
>And I still doubt whether a Khemri force could make a viable shooty list.
I'm convinced it can - the strength of the shots may be low, but TK archers are
*very* cheap. As in, they cost the same as Empire archers for models that
always hit on 5+. Throw in cheap cavalry as well and you have a lot of
firepower. No Khemrian unit has the firing advantages of skirmishers, to be
sure, but they have the numbers to cause real damage.
>> No, but neither would be a great loss if one went the Khemrian route -
>skellies
>> almost always strike last after the charge so that's a virtual irrelevance,
>and
>> zombies don't have equipment options full stop. At the same time they
>aren't
>> cheap enough compared with skellies to compensate for even minor drawbacks,
>so
>> why not a single 40-strong unit with skellie equipment options?
>
>This is pure sophistry. One of the most significant differences between
>Zombies and Skeletons is in the Invocation of Nehek, which lets you top
>up Zombie units at an alarming rate, or summon viably sized ones from
>scratch. That difference alone justifies the separate units.
The spell has different effects on different infantry units? That I hadn't
known and it does make zombies more useful. Interesting to note that the Khemri
version of this spell doesn't let you take units beyond the normal maximum and
can't create all-new units, by the way.
>> >> The
>> >> army relies too much on underpriced special units and not enough on its
>> >grunts.
>> >> Ghouls are handled well, but that's about it.
>> >
>> >Underpriced special units like? My VC army relies on Ghouls...
>>
>> Wights of both flavours - not underpriced by more than a point or two, but
>a
>> bargain compared with skellies or zombies, which is why the standard
>> non-Necrarch set up for a vC army seems to be a few Ghouls for Core
>> requirements and a lot of Wights.
>
>If some players use a list to make silly armies, it's hardly a
>condemnation of the whole list. The most amazing crap can be put together
>with the basic Space Marine list in 40K, yet it isn't by any means a bad
>list.
GW deliberately 'weights' armies in a certain direction with its points values
- if it wants a lot of Core units, they become cheap and other units are
overpriced in comparison, due to GW's conviction that these imbalances will
cancel each other out. Compare, for instance, Ravening Hordes High Elves with
Warhammer Armies - High Elves and you'll see one very clear trend in unit
pricing; infantry becomes more expensive with few or no new abilities, cavalry
invariably comes down in price and Dragon Princes get an added bonus. If you
look at Khemri, basic skeleton infantry with hand weapons are overpriced, but
cavalry and archers are a bargain. In the VC case, Zombies and Skellies got the
short end of the stick and Wights gained, all compared with RH. On that basis I
think it is fair to criticise the list for promoting special units and small
regiments of the best Core troops.
>> From what I recall of the fluff released in WD with the 5th Ed. release,
>the
>> vampires of all lineages gravitated towards Sylvania after they became
>refugees
>> from Lahmia, not just the von Carsteins.
>
>This is definitely untrue in 6th ed.
Then I should definitely give it a look, and more kudos to Alessio. Still, I
must have got that impression from somewhere and I feel sure it was in the 5th
Ed. fluff.
>> >> There's no reason you couldn't have a vampire-led Necromancer army;
>after
>> >all,
>> >> you can have VC armies led by Necromancers or TK armies led by Liche
>> >Priests if
>> >> you so desire. But these are the exception rather than the norm, and
>what's
>> >> more von Carstein invasions tend to be led by a von Carstein - just as
>in
>> >4th
>> >> Ed., you can represent them by using a normal army led by a vC special
>> >> character.
>> >
>> >True, but why do you insist it has to be a Necromancer list?
>>
>> Partly for consistency with the original Undead fluff, including the return
>of
>> Nagash which appears to have been completely forgotten in the current
>> storyline,
>
>Tell me about it...
>
Well, there was this ancient Great Necromancer fellow and he was awakening from
death around the time of the 4th Ed. army book. Only now he isn't...
>> Why are wraiths and necromancers suddenly not found in Khemri? The original
>> Undead book was a mishmash of Undead from across the Warhammer World -
>some,
>> like mummies and most Liches, were Khemrian in origin while others like
>wights
>> and ghouls are mostly found in the Old World (leaving aside for the moment
>the
>> fact that the original ghoul tribes were from the Southlands).
>
>I still vote for a single Undead book to resolve the differences.
With all the new units added to each army, that would make for an impressive
list. Still, with Khemri established as an army in its own right I'd be
reluctant to drop that distinctiveness.
>If you want to be pedantic, Liches weren't relocated, they vanished.
Well, then it's even easier to claim that your Old World Necromancer is a Liche
with identical stats... IIRC, Liches were the least popular general type in 4th
Ed. and they hadn't had models in production since before I started playing
WFB.
>> ><profound sigh> So, you've never seen the Blood Dragon fluff in the
>> >Vampire Counts army book?
>>
>> I've seen the BD fluff printed in White Dwarf in both 5th and 6th Ed.
>Didn't
>> stick in the mind too well, but I can't recall any fundamental differences
>in
>> ethos between Blood Dragons and human Knights.
>
>Then I'll advise you to re-read it, since there is a very fundamental
>difference. The two have very little to do with each other.
I'll have to dig it out, then. Who knows, I may even be tempted to get a copy
of the VC book.
><snip>
>> >> > Admirable considering he works for GW.
>> >>
>> >> It's only the English who are dullards...
>> >
>> >Unfortunately, this seems to be true... BTW, I hear Tuomas Pirinen is off
>> >designing some silly console games.
>>
>> Pity. At the very least, Mordheim would probably have benefited a fair bit
>if
>> he'd done a spell with Fanatic.
>
>Did he give any reason for leaving GW?
You need a reason to leave GW?
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
<the_blue_ra...@iprimus.com.au> writes:
>"P Bowles" <pbo...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20021122183618...@mb-dh.aol.com...
><snip>
>> I can just picture a zombie reminiscing "I was in Night
>> of the Living Dead, you know" or "Things were so much better when I was
>> alive..."
>
>Or "I was working in the lab, late one night...".
:-) Haven't heard that for years - I'm sure it used to be dragged out every
October 31.
There was a sickening dislocating sound, and then a splash.
"Nursh," called his companion, whose green-grey face was missing all but one of
its teeth, that one having been sewn back on rather crudely. "Fred'ss jaw hash
jusht fallen into hish shoup."
The nurse sighed as she walked over to Fred's table and fished his lower jaw
out of his dinner. When she'd applied for a job at an old people's home, she
hadn't realised just how old most of the residents would be. And although she
was accustomed to strange smells in this sort of environment, she hadn't been
prepared for clients who had actually gone off.
As the nurse reattached the jaw, the zombie who had spoken seemed to be
thinking about something. He looked across the table - a ghoul was holding
something in both hands and gnawing happily. Slowly, the dead man turned to
gaze at his left shoulder, and his eyes carried on downwards.
"Nursh," he said plaintively, "the ghoul'sh eating my arm."
Philip Bowles
chaosmnky
> The price, for starters - £3.50 and you only get 120 sheets of toilet paper.
Most mags are on the pricey side these days, though- look at the
console mags at £5 a pop for pap.
Anton Svärd
"P Bowles" <pbo...@aol.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:20021125103937...@mb-ml.aol.com...
> >The last point is patently untrue if one accepts Dire Wolves as cavalry.
>
> As far as I know, Dire Wolves aren't Core. And how expensive are they,
anyway?
They are core, fast cavalry, and cost 10 points.
> >And I still doubt whether a Khemri force could make a viable shooty list.
>
> I'm convinced it can - the strength of the shots may be low, but TK
archers are
> *very* cheap. As in, they cost the same as Empire archers for models that
> always hit on 5+. Throw in cheap cavalry as well and you have a lot of
> firepower. No Khemrian unit has the firing advantages of skirmishers, to
be
> sure, but they have the numbers to cause real damage.
Most of all, throw in a couple of SS Catapults with the Skulls of the Foe
upgrade.
> The spell has different effects on different infantry units? That I hadn't
> known and it does make zombies more useful.
You get D6 Skeletons or D6 +1 Zombies per level of the spell.
Interesting to note that the Khemri
> version of this spell doesn't let you take units beyond the normal maximum
and
> can't create all-new units, by the way.
The fluff base for this would be that they don't go around summoning any old
corpses laying about. They command the soldiers sworn to serve the Tomb
Kings, and if the soldiers should fall, they call upon them to serve again.
In the VC case, Zombies and Skellies got the
> short end of the stick and Wights gained, all compared with RH. On that
basis I
> think it is fair to criticise the list for promoting special units and
small
> regiments of the best Core troops.
Promoting special units compared to RH, yes, but Skeletons are by no means
uncommon in VC armies, and not all players use Wights. Zombies are not
uncommon despite the original complaints at the raised cost, but then they
used to be the best value in the game when they cost 4 points.
> >Did he give any reason for leaving GW?
>
> You need a reason to leave GW?
Actually I think Tuomas has joined the Warhammer Online project.
/Anton
--
Pigs are fer eatin' - not fer sittin' on.
P Bowles
chao...@hotmail.com (chaosmnky) writes:
National Geographic's cheaper than White Dwarf, and there's no competition when
it comes to which is highest-quality. Geographical may not be much more than a
travel mag these days but it's still a reasonable deal at under £3. Neither
skimps on colour sections or glossy pages either. New Scientist's only £2.30,
and that's had a price hike within the last year or so. And so on and so on.
Philip Bowles
incrdbil
wrote:
>
>This has gotten me thinking. If you were in charge of White Dwarf, what would
>you do?
Execute anyone who has written to the "Letters" page with the dreaded
GW secret police.
Ban anything by Thorpe.
Not waste CA articles on "Why we made this army".
Of course there would be attention to new releases and such. Dedicate
a section to painting and terrain crafting for both the newbie and the
veteran.
Battle reports made up of forces you might actually see in
battle--make the painters in the studio paint worthwhile forces, or
use forces from actual players. Get the rules correctly. Never print
a battle report doen in a 'fiction' style.
Every issue has an errata section, every month, without fail, until no
product in print needs any correction.
Burn the LOTR section.
Dump reports of staff tourneys,, the useless retailer poster insert in
the US, and reduce the pages wasted on GT advertisement by at least
half. Accept more player created content--since it beats anythign the
staff can do.
That's just a small start.
incrdbil
<keepin...@homeboys.com> wrote:
>
>Done well, I still believe WD could be an excellent journal. After all,
>there has to be something of value in the whole thing, otherwise why do so
>many of us spend our time yakking about it?
The only reason I've had a WD subscription was the deal giving
merchandise equal to the value of a subscription, and wanting the
official errata documentation--and the IA lists that came out--though
they are becoming more and more disappointing. There has been
absolutely nothing else of any use, whatsoever, in it.
Without an equal deal, there's no way I'll resub, and I'll just buy
the yearly compilation, only for the errata and official rules
addition. The consistantly poor quality this year deserves nothing
else.
The Blue Raja
news:ac875ba6.02112...@posting.google.com...
> > The price, for starters - £3.50 and you only get 120 sheets of toilet
paper.
>
> Most mags are on the pricey side these days, though- look at the
> console mags at £5 a pop for pap.
Yeah, but those usually come with demo cds. WD dropped the only thing
vaguely equivalent: the cardboard insert.
The Blue Raja
> >> The price, for starters - £3.50 and you only get 120 sheets of toilet
> >paper.
> >
> >Most mags are on the pricey side these days, though- look at the
> >console mags at £5 a pop for pap.
>
> National Geographic's cheaper than White Dwarf, and there's no competition
when
> it comes to which is highest-quality. Geographical may not be much more
than a
> travel mag these days but it's still a reasonable deal at under £3.
Neither
> skimps on colour sections or glossy pages either. New Scientist's only
£2.30,
> and that's had a price hike within the last year or so. And so on and so
on.
Short of specialist import mags, WD comes out the worst value for money
AFAICT. A short comparison:
WD - $9.95AU;
PC PowerPlay (PC gaming mag) - $9.95AU, includes 2 CDs of demos & stuff;
DVD PowerPlay (As above, but with DVD) - $11.95, includes 1 DVD, containing
everything above, plus more, plus an episode of an anime series (nice as we
don't get it on TV and it's often hard to hunt down in the newsagents);
New Idea (women's mag) - ~$3.50, about the same size, paper/print quality,
etc as WD
Now, obviously the PowerPlays are a hugely better investment, since it takes
a few hours to check out all the stuff on the CDs/DVD, plus the time spent
playing demos (I've been playing Unreal Tournament 2003 for about 3 weeks),
plus the mag itself, which contains the usual reviews and previews on
hardware and software.
New Idea is there for comparison. In terms of physical material, they're
about equal. One does have to remember though, that New Idea has to pay
reporters to go and find their stories, celebs for writing crappy recipes,
paprazzi for photos, etc. Although they obviously have a much larger
distribution, I can't see how the price of a mag which involves actual
*research* from *journalists* can cost 1/3 the price of a mag written poorly
by internal staff, whose primary job is mostly something else (eg Design
Studio staff) and probably only get a minor amount (if anything) for their
WD articles.
The Blue Raja
> >Done well, I still believe WD could be an excellent journal. After all,
> >there has to be something of value in the whole thing, otherwise why do
so
> >many of us spend our time yakking about it?
>
> The only reason I've had a WD subscription was the deal giving
> merchandise equal to the value of a subscription,
How do you manage to get those anyway? It seems that the US takes a vastly
different approach to dealing out WDs.
RT Maitreya
> The only reason I've had a WD subscription was the deal giving
> merchandise equal to the value of a subscription, and wanting the
> official errata documentation--
Roger that.
> Without an equal deal, there's no way I'll resub,
Same.
RTM
Robert Singers
> Short of specialist import mags, WD comes out the worst value for money
> AFAICT. A short comparison:
> WD - $9.95AU;
WD ~$11NZ
Dragon ~$21.00NZ
Dungeon ~$29.00NZ
Archaeology ~19.00NZ
incrdbil
<the_blue_ra...@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
>"incrdbil" <incr...@flinthills.com> wrote in message
>
>How do you manage to get those anyway? It seems that the US takes a vastly
>different approach to dealing out WDs.
I think there was some desperate rush to push WD subs last year. They
did it at Xmas time before--1 year, $25 for 12 issues, $25worth of
certain box sets or bitz.
>
>--
>
The Blue Raja
news:arug3k$1das$1...@si05.rsvl.unisys.com...
> > Short of specialist import mags, WD comes out the worst value for money
> > AFAICT. A short comparison:
> > WD - $9.95AU;
>
> WD ~$11NZ
>
> Dragon ~$21.00NZ
> Dungeon ~$29.00NZ
Aren't these "specialist import mags"? IMO WD has no excuse, as it's
printed in Australia.
> Archaeology ~19.00NZ
Is this import too? Or just really expensive?
I believe National Geographic is a similar cost here.
The Blue Raja
> >How do you manage to get those anyway? It seems that the US takes a
vastly
> >different approach to dealing out WDs.
>
> I think there was some desperate rush to push WD subs last year. They
> did it at Xmas time before--1 year, $25 for 12 issues, $25worth of
> certain box sets or bitz.
Pretty nice deal, I doubt we'd ever see anything remotely similar here.
AU deal: $120 for 12 issues (the retail price), ~$20 item free (eg SM Bike
is ~$18).
Robert Singers
> "Robert Singers" wrote
> > > Short of specialist import mags, WD comes out the worst value for money
> > > AFAICT. A short comparison:
> > > WD - $9.95AU;
> >
> > WD ~$11NZ
> >
> > Dragon ~$21.00NZ
> > Dungeon ~$29.00NZ
>
> Aren't these "specialist import mags"? IMO WD has no excuse, as it's
> printed in Australia.
Well it's still an import here. In terms of Quality Dragon and Dungeon probably
far outweigh WD. Some of the Adventures in Dungeon are extremely good.
Definately better than paying ~$70 for a single module.
> > Archaeology ~19.00NZ
>
> Is this import too? Or just really expensive?
> I believe National Geographic is a similar cost here.
Yep from the US of A.
The Blue Raja
> > > WD ~$11NZ
> > >
> > > Dragon ~$21.00NZ
> > > Dungeon ~$29.00NZ
> >
> > Aren't these "specialist import mags"? IMO WD has no excuse, as it's
> > printed in Australia.
>
> Well it's still an import here.
True, although I thought there was some sort of import tax break for AU<->NZ
affairs?
> In terms of Quality Dragon and Dungeon probably
> far outweigh WD. Some of the Adventures in Dungeon are extremely good.
> Definately better than paying ~$70 for a single module.
As opposed to WD, where the campaigns aren't better than paying $5 for a
12-pack of dunny rolls.
> > > Archaeology ~19.00NZ
> >
> > Is this import too? Or just really expensive?
> > I believe National Geographic is a similar cost here.
>
> Yep from the US of A.
There's your problem. I see the same thing with PC mags, local stuff runs
at about $10, with import stuff being about $17 (and 3 months old).
I separated WD from the import stuff since (at least here, and I assumed
there) there wouldn't be import taxes on it or the other mags I was
comparing it with. Once you have to factor in/out import tax things get
silly.
Robert Singers
> There's your problem. I see the same thing with PC mags, local stuff runs
> at about $10, with import stuff being about $17 (and 3 months old).
> I separated WD from the import stuff since (at least here, and I assumed
> there) there wouldn't be import taxes on it or the other mags I was
> comparing it with. Once you have to factor in/out import tax things get
> silly.
Basically magazines should be cheaper than Novels.
The Blue Raja
That'd be nice, especially since I only paid $6 for Dune.
the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King
> "Robert Singers" <rsin...@finger.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:arujru$1g4h$1...@si05.rsvl.unisys.com...
>
>>>There's your problem. I see the same thing with PC mags, local stuff
>>
> runs
>
>>>at about $10, with import stuff being about $17 (and 3 months old).
>>>I separated WD from the import stuff since (at least here, and I assumed
>>>there) there wouldn't be import taxes on it or the other mags I was
>>>comparing it with. Once you have to factor in/out import tax things get
>>>silly.
>>
>>Basically magazines should be cheaper than Novels.
>
>
> That'd be nice, especially since I only paid $6 for Dune.
>
>
--
the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King
"Can't sleep or the clowns will eat me!"
read the FAQ http://www.rgmw.org/
"Sam displays many of the traits that make RGMW 'the cesspit of
usenet'"-Mike Hunt aka Will
John Hwang
>johnhw...@cs.com.no.com (John Hwang) writes:
>>>kai gun
>>
>>I'm sure that arm would be swapped out.
>
>And all the CSM armour on the other bits?
From what I see, the two lines of armour have merged.
>Even the head with its rivets?
Not sure what you intend here. .
>>>the head at a pinch could be made from a cowled INQ scale
>>>head
>>
>>Adeptus Mechanicus?
>
>I haven't looked at that one - thanks for the idea. Or maybe I'll make a
>Green Stuff cowl for a dessicated Daemonhost head.
Green Stuff might work -- give it a try..
>>>and possibly Orion's horns, but there aren't any oversized scythes in any
>>range).
>>
>>Easy enough to make, IMO.
>
>Well, the blade is simple enough - Chaos Warrior chariot scythe - but the
>haft?
>Bearing in mind that it needs to look like a fairly crude wooden weapon with
>a couple of bends along its length.
Green stuff around a paper clip.
--
--- John Hwang "JohnHw...@cs.com.no.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny
The Blue Raja
news:3DE2E758...@spammersFOAD.optushome.com.au...
> >>Basically magazines should be cheaper than Novels.
> >
> > That'd be nice, especially since I only paid $6 for Dune.
> >
> New or secondhand? I have three copies of Dune for some reason.
Brand-spankin' new. It was supposed to be $9.95, but Big W was having a
"15% off everything" day. When they scanned it, it only came up as like $8,
then the discount knocked it down to under $6.
the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King
> "the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King"
> <mani...@spammersFOAD.optushome.com.au> wrote in message
> news:3DE2E758...@spammersFOAD.optushome.com.au...
>
>>>>Basically magazines should be cheaper than Novels.
>>>
>>>That'd be nice, especially since I only paid $6 for Dune.
>>>
>>
>>New or secondhand? I have three copies of Dune for some reason.
>
>
> Brand-spankin' new. It was supposed to be $9.95, but Big W was having a
> "15% off everything" day. When they scanned it, it only came up as like $8,
> then the discount knocked it down to under $6.
>
city (one of the only dedicated scifi/fantasy bookshops in Melbourne)
closed down for all you geeks, probably because they charged too much
for their books.
I hardly ever get new books for or myself nowadays, most of the time
it's secondhand or previously been read by my partner.
--
the Phat DJ Spayce Elf Clowne King
The Blue Raja
<snip>
> I hardly ever get new books for or myself nowadays, most of the time
> it's secondhand or previously been read by my partner.
The stuff I'm reading at the moment is borrowed from my roommate: all
Tolkein (going through The Silmarillion at the moment) :o)
I'm notorious for buying books and not reading them.
chaosmnky
> WD dropped the only thing vaguely equivalent: the cardboard insert.
Maybe if they had more advertising the price could drop...
The Blue Raja
>
> Maybe if they had more advertising the price could drop...
The only way White Dwarf could have more ads is if they increased the page
count.
Mikael
chao...@hotmail.com would have us believe that:
> "The Blue Raja" <the_blue_ra...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message news:<arufc5$m9pns$1...@ID-144789.news.dfncis.de>...
> > WD dropped the only thing vaguely equivalent: the cardboard insert.
>
> Maybe if they had more advertising the price could drop...
What do you mean, "more advertising"? The whole so-called magazine is one
big advertisement!
--
Mikael
--
"The University is the fountain of knowledge,
and the students are here to drink."
RGMW FAQ and stuff at http://www.rgmw.org
The Cheshire Cat
"Mikael" <mik...@ci5.gov> wrote in message
news:MPG.184dd0a71...@news.inet.fi...
> In article <ac875ba6.02112...@posting.google.com>,
> chao...@hotmail.com would have us believe that:
> > "The Blue Raja" <the_blue_ra...@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:<arufc5$m9pns$1...@ID-144789.news.dfncis.de>...
> > > WD dropped the only thing vaguely equivalent: the cardboard insert.
> >
> > Maybe if they had more advertising the price could drop...
>
> What do you mean, "more advertising"? The whole so-called magazine is one
> big advertisement!
>
>
i think he means outside advertisement.
well guess what? this is what happens when you alienate all others and
refuse to advertise their products...they do the same to you.
John Hwang
><snip>
>> I hardly ever get new books for or myself nowadays, most of the time
>> it's secondhand or previously been read by my partner.
>
>The stuff I'm reading at the moment is borrowed from my roommate: all
>Tolkein (going through The Silmarillion at the moment) :o)
>I'm notorious for buying books and not reading them.
Unlike those unnamed persons on the NG who're notoroious for buying minis and
not fielding them, much less painting them? :)
RT Maitreya
>>The stuff I'm reading at the moment is borrowed from my roommate: all
>>Tolkein (going through The Silmarillion at the moment) :o)
>>I'm notorious for buying books and not reading them.
>
> Unlike those unnamed persons on the NG who're notoroious for buying minis and
> not fielding them, much less painting them? :)
Yeah, whoever those losers are.
RTM
The Fresh fog
...haven't a clue...
--
b
The Fresh Fog and DJ Jizzy Bear:
Look for our new CD, "Wakin' da Babay!"
on sale now at all major music retailers.
"I know you miss the Wainwrights, Bobby, but they
were weak and stupid people--and that's why
we have wolves and other large predators."
-- Gary Larson, The Far Side
R.G.M.W FAQ - http://rgmw.b3p0.com/rgmw/rgmw-faq.html Just read it!
Keith Hann
> On 25 Nov 2002 09:47:32 GMT, black...@aol.com.is.evil (St.
> Jason) wrote:
> >
> >This has gotten me thinking. If you were in charge of White Dwarf,
> > what would you do?
>
> Execute anyone who has written to the "Letters" page with the dreaded
> GW secret police.
The Letters page could actually be a useful thing if handled correctly.
I remember when back in the double-digit issues when they actually
posted letters not from 8 year olds saying how cool Blood Angels are. You
used to get pretty scathing critique actually, and actual insightful
questions, with answers from actual staff. I miss that.
KH
P Bowles
chao...@hotmail.com (chaosmnky) writes:
How? All GW's advertising is internal, so there's no sponsorship and there are
no advertising fees to offset the magazine's cost. Given this fact, advertising
of any kind is superfluous and should be dropped. To reduce the cost they could
cut the colour sections to the articles that really need it (do we *really*
need full-colour photos of Studio staff moving models about?) such as painting
and modelling articles, and use less glossy paper.
Philip Bowles
P Bowles
<f...@rgmw.org> writes:
>> >>The stuff I'm reading at the moment is borrowed from my roommate: all
>> >>Tolkein (going through The Silmarillion at the moment) :o)
>> >>I'm notorious for buying books and not reading them.
>> >
>> > Unlike those unnamed persons on the NG who're notoroious for buying minis
>and
>> > not fielding them, much less painting them? :)
>>
>>
>> Yeah, whoever those losers are.
>
>...haven't a clue...
I certainly can't imagine. All that dust is just painted on. Really.
Philip Bowles
Mikael
I keep those minis in their boxes to, erm, protect them. Unopened boxes?
Unopened, you say? Nonsense!
The Fresh fog
says...
> In article <20021126133709...@mb-cv.aol.com>, pbo...@aol.com
> would have us believe that:
> > In article <MPG.184d7f957...@News.CIS.DFN.DE>, The Fresh fog
> > <f...@rgmw.org> writes:
> >
> > >> >>The stuff I'm reading at the moment is borrowed from my roommate: all
> > >> >>Tolkein (going through The Silmarillion at the moment) :o)
> > >> >>I'm notorious for buying books and not reading them.
> > >> >
> > >> > Unlike those unnamed persons on the NG who're notoroious for buying minis
> > >and
> > >> > not fielding them, much less painting them? :)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Yeah, whoever those losers are.
> > >
> > >...haven't a clue...
> >
> > I certainly can't imagine. All that dust is just painted on. Really.
>
> I keep those minis in their boxes to, erm, protect them. Unopened boxes?
> Unopened, you say? Nonsense!
The shrinkwrap helps to protect them from the elements!
Mikael
>
> news:20021125103937...@mb-ml.aol.com...
>
> > >The last point is patently untrue if one accepts Dire Wolves as cavalry.
> >
> > As far as I know, Dire Wolves aren't Core. And how expensive are they,
> anyway?
>
> They are core, fast cavalry, and cost 10 points.
Thank you.
<snip>
> In the VC case, Zombies and Skellies got the
> > short end of the stick and Wights gained, all compared with RH. On that
> basis I
> > think it is fair to criticise the list for promoting special units and
> small
> > regiments of the best Core troops.
>
> Promoting special units compared to RH, yes, but Skeletons are by no means
> uncommon in VC armies, and not all players use Wights.
My impression of the "standard" VC army is that it's stil based on big
Skeleton and Zombie blocks, which is what 4th ed Undead were all about.
> Zombies are not
> uncommon despite the original complaints at the raised cost, but then they
> used to be the best value in the game when they cost 4 points.
This is only too true.
> > >Did he give any reason for leaving GW?
> >
> > You need a reason to leave GW?
>
> Actually I think Tuomas has joined the Warhammer Online project.
IIRC a local computer gaming magazine said he was sowrking on some kind
of console game. Can't be arsed to double-check at the moment.
Mikael
> writes:
>
> >In article <20021124184056...@mb-fr.aol.com>, pbo...@aol.com
> ><mik...@ci5.gov>
> >> writes:
> >>
> >> >In article <20021122183618...@mb-dh.aol.com>, pbo...@aol.com
> >> ><mik...@ci5.gov>
> >> >> writes:
>
> >> >Nice of them to finally do a proper fluff feature. Maybe they'd let me
> >> >write some of their fluff for once...
> >>
> >> They haven't got back to me about my suggestions ages ago, but then those
> >were
> >> for races which weren't due to be heavily-featured at the time. Still, I
> >can
> >> certainly turn my hand to WFB fluff and I wouldn't mind giving it a try.
> >
> >I've been considering it. If you see any Warhammer novels written with a
> >funny, CI5-related pseudonym in a year's time or so, well, don't say I
> >didn't warn you... =)
>
> I've been seriously thinking about a Mordheim novel, and another which will
> somehow involve protagonists from all three Elven nations fighting their own
> battles against the Chaos incursion.
Get to work, then, damn you. They need all the good fluff they can get.
> >> >I'm seriously considering it. My megalomaniac WFB plan is to eventually
> >> >assemble a 10,000 point army, made up of four smaller armies (CD, VC, DE,
> >> >DoW), and I can make the fluff hang together if the VC army is commmanded
> >> >by a Necromancer.
> >>
> >> Seems an odd combination
> >
> >It's supposed to be a 3v1l force of sorts. Led by a Chaos Dwarf Sorcerer
> >Lord, who has banded together with a Necromancer and a raiding party of
> >DE.
>
> It'd be a good subject for that novel...
Possibly, yes... I was thinking I'd feature them somewhere. To make
things suitably epic and mythical and w00+, there has to be a point to
all the collected 3v1lness...
> I'll probably be using DoW for my evil humans, since Chaos doesn't
> >really work for me...
>
> Chaos isn't evil anymore. :-(
Precisely. What rot.
> >> - though I did always wonder: with their constant need
> >> for slaves and dirty, toxic conditions, why the hell don't the Chaos Dwarfs
> >> learn necromancy and create skeletons to do all the work? It'd save
> >everyone a
> >> lot of bother.
> >
> >I have no idea. Maybe Chaos Dwarfs aren't into Dark Magic as such, or
> >they don't want to be linked to Nagash?
>
> I'm sure they could enslave a Necromancer if they needed to, or just pinch the
> Crown of Sorcery...
Indeed, but as below:
> > Endless speculation ensues...
> >Besides, maybe enslaving Goblin tribes is easier.
>
> Well, it's probably more fun and gives them an excuse to fight - what more
> could you ask for?
Precisely.
> >> Well, they tend to be slightly higher-class rip-offs. :-) To their credit,
> >the
> >> Tomb Kings have no pyramids in sight and some effort has gone into creating
> >> Egyptian-style weapons and shields, rather than just settling for the
> >> stereotypes of headdresses and bandages (although they are there as well).
> >
> >Yes, I appreciate the effort.
>
> For all my complaining about certain bits not going far enough (the Gothic
> spears and hand weapons, for instance), so do I. It's certainly a lot closer
> than GW's ever come before, and giving all these skeletons Egyptian imagery and
> equipment goes a long way towards giving the range a unified feel that the
> Vampire Counts don't have to the same extent.
The Vampire Count list can have that feel if properly used. The models,
OTOH, do not, no matter how one tries to view them.
> >I think WFB is successful at being a sort of generic fantasy game, but
> >that does involve a large amount of ripoffs by definition...
>
> To me the 'ripoffs' are the appeal - a fantasy universe conjured entirely from
> the writers' imagination wouldn't have the same attraction (especially given
> the limits of GW writers' imaginations). It's the particular background choices
> and connections that GW has made with generic fantasy races that make the GW
> races - a Lizardman is just a fantasy monster, and the Mayan civilisation is
> just an interesting period of Meso-American history. A Mayan Lizardman,
> however, is a unique creation of GW's - having the reptiles as the good guys
> goes against the grain of this genre (gggggg....), and incorporating real Maya
> events into the WFB world (for instance, the fall of the Maya civilisation
> through famine and environmental degradation is parallelled by the collapse of
> the Lizardmen cities due to a Skaven plague).
Oh, I know. Like I said, it's a successful fantasy game.
> And so it is with other races,
> including the humans - when GW came on the scene, a technological, Renaissance
> nation as the focus of the story was an innovation, as most fantasy up to that
> point had been mired in the firmly mediaeval worlds of Middle Earth clones.
The Renaissance part does make certain things look a bit funny, though,
as I commented elsewhere, but never mind that.
> > I've always
> >thought the Empire and DoW lists are a bit funny historically, though;
> >pikes are a stretch on a WFB battlefield, and they haven't got quite the
> >murderous effect on cavalry pikes ought to have.
>
> Arguably they're too effective against infantry as well.
Absolutely.
> The pike rule should
> probably be something like this:
>
> The pike is an extremely long spear, maybe 20 feet or more in length, whose
> reach makes it a formidable weapon against cavalry but cumbersome to use
> against infantry. Pikes are employed in tight formations where pikers can cover
> one another's 'blind spots' while presenting an impenetrable wall of spikes to
> cavalry.
>
> Fight in two ranks: Despite their reach, against infantry the pike's length
> makes it difficult to use from rear ranks without obstructing or being
> obstructed by the weapons and soldiers in front. Therefore a pike formation is
> treated as though it were armed with spears when fighting infantry.
>
> Against larger targets (cavalry, monsters and chariots) it is easier for an
> entire formation to engage the enemy. All models in a pike formation can fight
> one of these units, regardless of the number of ranks or the unit's facing. In
> addition, cavalry, monsters and chariots never negate a pike formation's rank
> bonus when attacking from the flank or rear.
Seems fair to me. I don't know about not negating the flank bonus,
though.
> >> >> No werewolves or Frankenstein's monster, but those
> >> >> are the only stereotypes missing. The Strigoi go a little way to giving
> >the
> >> >> newer fluff more depth, but not far enough.
> >> >
> >> >The Undead fluff has remarkable depth; I consider it some of the best WFB
> >> >fluff there is.
> >>
> >> The Undead fluff, by and large, is the Khemri fluff. Even in 4th Ed. the
> >> vampires only got a couple of pages.
> >
> >To be honest, it's all Nagash fluff in 4th ed.
>
> And where did he come from? Which culture was he steeped in? Who did he spend
> his life fighting, and which region provided the corpses he animated? Nehekhara
> and Khemri. Not to mention the fact that for two of the five millenia history
> of the Undead Nagash was completely inactive. True, the Khemrians weren't
> involved in the Old World activities of Kemmler, Helsnicht and the von
> Carsteins (though there were allusions to Settra's fleet operating around
> Bretonnia), but they were a larger part of the backstory than the Vampires. The
> Vampires' role in the war against Khemri was important, but not as much so as
> Khemri's role in that war.
Sure, Nagash came from Khemri. But his war with Khemri used to be only a
sideline in the Undead fluff, as in 4th ed. fluff, Nagash apparently
considered he'd accomplished what he wanted there when they were all,
well, dead. 4th ed fluff is about Nagash, first about Nagash versus
Khemri, then about Nagash vs. the world at large. The Undead aren't all
about Khemri no matter how one tries to spin it.
> >I always thought the point of the Vampire Counts list was to be able to
> >create a sort of undead Empire army, with foot troopers (Skeletons),
> >knights (Wights of both shades) and skirmishers (Ghouls). Although all
> >kinds of silly ideas like armies with huge loads of Wolves and ghosts are
> >possible, the basic outline of a VC army is eminently sensible. It's also
> >very much like the old 4th ed. Undead armies.
>
> I don't recall any skirmishers in the 4th Ed. Undead rules - even Carrion
> didn't skirmish back then, let alone Ghouls. And Wight Horsemen were
> prohibitively expensive in those days. Skeleton footsloggers and Skeleton
> cavalry were the order of the day, the latter being relatively
> lightly-equipped. Backed up by catapults of course. I still see more of an
> affinity with the Tomb Kings.
As Anton too has said, Skeletons and Zombies are still very much the menu
of the day in most VC armies. There are elements of the old Undead army
in both lists.
> >> >> I'd disagree on both counts, the latter especially. For coherency -
> >well,
> >> >> everything is a close combat troop of some variety, if that counts.
> >> >
> >> >You can't claim the Tomb Kings are any better in this respect. Very few
> >> >WFB armies are versatile at all.
> >>
> >> You can't deny that Khemri is more versatile than the Munsters - they have
> >> missile fire in abundance for Core units, they have artillery, and they
> >have
> >> wider (and cheaper) access to cavalry than the Vampires.
> >
> >The last point is patently untrue if one accepts Dire Wolves as cavalry.
>
> As far as I know, Dire Wolves aren't Core.
Ah, but they are.
> And how expensive are they, anyway?
10 points, did Anton say?
> >And I still doubt whether a Khemri force could make a viable shooty list.
>
> I'm convinced it can - the strength of the shots may be low, but TK archers are
> *very* cheap. As in, they cost the same as Empire archers for models that
> always hit on 5+. Throw in cheap cavalry as well and you have a lot of
> firepower. No Khemrian unit has the firing advantages of skirmishers, to be
> sure, but they have the numbers to cause real damage.
It's possible.
> >> No, but neither would be a great loss if one went the Khemrian route -
> >skellies
> >> almost always strike last after the charge so that's a virtual irrelevance,
> >and
> >> zombies don't have equipment options full stop. At the same time they
> >aren't
> >> cheap enough compared with skellies to compensate for even minor drawbacks,
> >so
> >> why not a single 40-strong unit with skellie equipment options?
> >
> >This is pure sophistry. One of the most significant differences between
> >Zombies and Skeletons is in the Invocation of Nehek, which lets you top
> >up Zombie units at an alarming rate, or summon viably sized ones from
> >scratch. That difference alone justifies the separate units.
>
> The spell has different effects on different infantry units? That I hadn't
> known and it does make zombies more useful.
Precisely. I had recalled the difference was larger than d6+1 as opposed
to d6 per spell level, but even that lets one be almost totally certain
of succesfully raising a new unit at power level 2.
> Interesting to note that the Khemri
> version of this spell doesn't let you take units beyond the normal maximum and
> can't create all-new units, by the way.
Makes sense in a way.
> >> >Underpriced special units like? My VC army relies on Ghouls...
> >>
> >> Wights of both flavours - not underpriced by more than a point or two, but
> >a
> >> bargain compared with skellies or zombies, which is why the standard
> >> non-Necrarch set up for a vC army seems to be a few Ghouls for Core
> >> requirements and a lot of Wights.
> >
> >If some players use a list to make silly armies, it's hardly a
> >condemnation of the whole list. The most amazing crap can be put together
> >with the basic Space Marine list in 40K, yet it isn't by any means a bad
> >list.
>
> GW deliberately 'weights' armies in a certain direction with its points values
> - if it wants a lot of Core units, they become cheap and other units are
> overpriced in comparison, due to GW's conviction that these imbalances will
> cancel each other out. Compare, for instance, Ravening Hordes High Elves with
> Warhammer Armies - High Elves and you'll see one very clear trend in unit
> pricing; infantry becomes more expensive with few or no new abilities, cavalry
> invariably comes down in price and Dragon Princes get an added bonus. If you
> look at Khemri, basic skeleton infantry with hand weapons are overpriced, but
> cavalry and archers are a bargain. In the VC case, Zombies and Skellies got the
> short end of the stick and Wights gained, all compared with RH. On that basis I
> think it is fair to criticise the list for promoting special units and small
> regiments of the best Core troops.
I don't, simply because VC armies of large Special units and minimal Core
requirements so rarely happen. Ghouls are one of the most powerful units
in the list, and they're core. As has been said, most armies are still
based around the Core regiments of Skeletons and/or Zombies.
> >> From what I recall of the fluff released in WD with the 5th Ed. release,
> >the
> >> vampires of all lineages gravitated towards Sylvania after they became
> >refugees
> >> from Lahmia, not just the von Carsteins.
> >
> >This is definitely untrue in 6th ed.
>
> Then I should definitely give it a look, and more kudos to Alessio. Still, I
> must have got that impression from somewhere and I feel sure it was in the 5th
> Ed. fluff.
I completely missed 5th ed, so I can't really comment on it.
> >> >> There's no reason you couldn't have a vampire-led Necromancer army;
> >after
> >> >all,
> >> >> you can have VC armies led by Necromancers or TK armies led by Liche
> >> >Priests if
> >> >> you so desire. But these are the exception rather than the norm, and
> >what's
> >> >> more von Carstein invasions tend to be led by a von Carstein - just as
> >in
> >> >4th
> >> >> Ed., you can represent them by using a normal army led by a vC special
> >> >> character.
> >> >
> >> >True, but why do you insist it has to be a Necromancer list?
> >>
> >> Partly for consistency with the original Undead fluff, including the return
> >of
> >> Nagash which appears to have been completely forgotten in the current
> >> storyline,
> >
> >Tell me about it...
> >
>
> Well, there was this ancient Great Necromancer fellow and he was awakening from
> death around the time of the 4th Ed. army book. Only now he isn't...
=P
> >> Why are wraiths and necromancers suddenly not found in Khemri? The original
> >> Undead book was a mishmash of Undead from across the Warhammer World -
> >some,
> >> like mummies and most Liches, were Khemrian in origin while others like
> >wights
> >> and ghouls are mostly found in the Old World (leaving aside for the moment
> >the
> >> fact that the original ghoul tribes were from the Southlands).
> >
> >I still vote for a single Undead book to resolve the differences.
>
> With all the new units added to each army, that would make for an impressive
> list. Still, with Khemri established as an army in its own right I'd be
> reluctant to drop that distinctiveness.
True enough.
> >If you want to be pedantic, Liches weren't relocated, they vanished.
>
> Well, then it's even easier to claim that your Old World Necromancer is a Liche
> with identical stats... IIRC, Liches were the least popular general type in 4th
> Ed. and they hadn't had models in production since before I started playing
> WFB.
I still want them back. <grumble>
> >> ><profound sigh> So, you've never seen the Blood Dragon fluff in the
> >> >Vampire Counts army book?
> >>
> >> I've seen the BD fluff printed in White Dwarf in both 5th and 6th Ed.
> >Didn't
> >> stick in the mind too well, but I can't recall any fundamental differences
> >in
> >> ethos between Blood Dragons and human Knights.
> >
> >Then I'll advise you to re-read it, since there is a very fundamental
> >difference. The two have very little to do with each other.
>
> I'll have to dig it out, then. Who knows, I may even be tempted to get a copy
> of the VC book.
It's rather good, IMO.
<snip>
> >> >> > Admirable considering he works for GW.
> >> >>
> >> >> It's only the English who are dullards...
> >> >
> >> >Unfortunately, this seems to be true... BTW, I hear Tuomas Pirinen is off
> >> >designing some silly console games.
> >>
> >> Pity. At the very least, Mordheim would probably have benefited a fair bit
> >if
> >> he'd done a spell with Fanatic.
> >
> >Did he give any reason for leaving GW?
>
> You need a reason to leave GW?
I was just wondering if he said anything.
RT Maitreya
>>>I certainly can't imagine. All that dust is just painted on. Really.
>>>
>>I keep those minis in their boxes to, erm, protect them. Unopened boxes?
>>Unopened, you say? Nonsense!
>
> The shrinkwrap helps to protect them from the elements!
I open them, paint them silvery stone colored (my chapter and warbands
are all named "the silver rock golems") and model their bases as smooth
black lava rock with squarish openings, indicative of the angular crags
on their native homeworld.
Then I put them back in their packages after all that work, in order to
protect them. Better than sealant, I always say.
RTM