Legion of Nagash Bone Thrower

[Disciple of Nagash]

I like the idea of having a unique name, but I don't think we should use priest. It sounds like they are characters or use magic.

I have updated the first post with the current accepted version.

 

[Bishop]

Yeah, should call them something different (I haven't got an idea though, sorry).

A restriction should be added that the crew number can never exceed the starting crew number (so you don't have 15 skeletons manning a war machine).

Most Bolt Throwers in the Warhammer universe only have 2 crew members. I think that should be changed (back?) to 2 models.

 

[Disciple of Nagash]

I agree with those two points Bishop, I'll edit them in. We still need to think of a new name for them...

 

[Marcus Von Drac]

Wait, why are we changing the nameof the Crew? It a Bone Thrower, crewed by skeletons. Simple no?
but if you really want to change their name, hmmm: Seige Cadavers?

 

[Disciple of Nagash]

Hmm, not bad. Everyone else ok with that?

 

[Disciple of Nagash]

No comments so I'll edit that into the first post. Any more comments on this one?

 

[Marcus Von Drac]

Ok, I am going to go to the extreme of Nit-picking here:
1) Shouldn't it be crewed by 2 Seige Cadavers, rather than 2 skeletons.
2) On the profile, I would remove the plural - in other words its just the profile for 1 Seige Cadaver rather than multiple.
Apart from that I think this unit is done now. Well ok, its done anyway, I just wanted to put something a little more productive into this post.

 

[TheZombieSquig]

I like the idea, but I think it's a little cheap, especially if you can get 2 per special slot.

The ensorcelled rule makes all the difference in terms of performance, even DE reapers spend a lot of their time hitting on 5+ and they're trained artillery crew. This would mean that the bone thrower could pick off lone wizards etc. with 5+, especially with D3 wounds. Maybe if it was just +1 to hit, to balance the skeleton's BS, and not ignoring modifiers.

I think they should be more expensive, because the army weighs ranged equipment/units more highly than other armies, given the way it plays.

 

[Disciple of Nagash]

Ok, I was going to put this forward to vote, however I noted the last comment.

Firstly I don't think this should be more expensive, I think it is costly as it is.

But I can however see the point in regards to having the unmodifiable 5+ to hit could prove possibly OP. Any suggestions on how to rectify this?

 

[Bishop]

What are you firing your DE RBTs at where you are hitting [consistently?] on 5+ (-1 Range, -1 skirmishers/lone character)? Maybe you should be picking better targets...

Is the primary concern about picking off lone characters?? (Who really DO deserve to get shot to crap for being SO stupid in the first place ) Or is it simply that it always hits on 5+?

If it's the former then you could add in that the penalty for firing at skirmishers will ALWAYS apply. (ie. it's a max 5+, unless fired at a skirmisher then it'd be a max 6+).

EDIT: actually, re-wording to ignore all RANGE penalties, that should give the same effect, and be much cleaner to word /EDIT

I just went back and re-read the wording on the new special rule... perhaps it could be worded exactly like the TK rule (no modifiers, positive or negative).

 

[Disciple of Nagash]

Looking at that I would suggest the second wording you wrote:

No negative range modifiers apply to the shots.

This way you can still get the benefit if they are closer / large targets, but you are still hard pressed to hit single characters etc. Against normal units you would just be on a standard 5+ to hit which seems fine to me.

 

[Marcus Von Drac]

Yes that would seem fair to me. After all, even Skeletons should be able to aim better when a block of infantry is 3" away ^.^

 

[Disciple of Nagash]

Ok, I'll edit it in.

 

[Marcus Von Drac]

OK, I would say it was good now. I can't think of any alerations that need making.