| The One Ring http://wwww.one-ring.co.uk/ |
|
| Hobbit edition rules - good or bad? http://wwww.one-ring.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=33172 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Salattu [ Mon Aug 14, 2017 10:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Hobbit edition rules - good or bad? |
So, these hobbits rules are problematic. Apparently people in this forum do not realize this. So, here is briefly some points: Which hobbit rules i would keep: 1. Shooting value -1 to moving cavalry. This would indeed affect only cavalry (to prevent rohan being op). 2. Some sort of monstrous strikes possibly such as hurl. 3. Transfix affecting only 50%. 4. Defender can use every willpoints one by one to counter a spell is very good. Which hobbit rules i hate A LOT: 1. Special strikes. Old weapon-system worked awesomely (spear, 1h, 2h, pike, elf blade (basically 1 and 2h), whip, etc... Now, there is a lot of mess with new rules. These special strikes take a lot time and are much less balanced, and do not bring any meaningful content to game... Some monstrous strikes end to this category as well... 2. Volley fire removed. |
|
| Author: | Salattu [ Tue Aug 15, 2017 9:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hobbit edition rules - good or bad? |
Oh and fury with 1/3 chance to cure is a bit overpowered... Old one with just 1/6 chance was more sort of "courage bringer" now it makes armies rly tanky... Idk, it might be fair or unfair depending on situation... What do you think of this new fury? |
|
| Author: | Reto [ Wed Aug 16, 2017 8:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hobbit edition rules - good or bad? |
I like the new Hobbit rules. Brutal power attacks and the new heroic actions are just necessary. Limiting shooting was also a good way to go. In the past, the game was to much focused on shooting and it could finish the game before it even begun. I agree that special strikes take to much time. I would prefer to see them gone or at least get rid of the extra dicerolls. Fury is just fine. Even now, I don't think it is worth it in some armies. |
|
| Author: | Salattu [ Sat Aug 19, 2017 12:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hobbit edition rules - good or bad? |
So apparently everyone agrees that normal units should not have special strikes. But what about these monster-rules such as hurl? Are they really that needed? Especially now, when we consider the fact that archering is nerfed - mordor, goblins etc "non-archer-factions" benefit this situation already. Right now they abuse fellbeasts etc in a way that feels wrong. <__< |
|
| Author: | Dikey [ Sat Aug 19, 2017 8:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hobbit edition rules - good or bad? |
I am not against special strikes, I am against special strikes as they are now. -feint: way too easy, no drawbacks. Plus, why a model with Fight 1 or 2 should be able to feint? F1 is the lowest level possible, basically the model can barely hold the weapon without stabbing himself by accident. -piercing strike: oh boy. I'd just add another sentence: if the piercing striking model's defence drops to 1, models who strike against him gain +1 to their wound roll.. -bash: another roll-off? No thanks. Like many others, I believe that Fell Beasts need to change. No matter how you look at it, a Named Nazgul on fellbeast shouldn't be as expensive as gandalf the Grey on foot. The access to power attacks only increased the gap. |
|
| Author: | Reto [ Tue Aug 22, 2017 9:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Hobbit edition rules - good or bad? |
Salattu wrote: So apparently everyone agrees that normal units should not have special strikes. But what about these monster-rules such as hurl? Are they really that needed? Especially now, when we consider the fact that archering is nerfed - mordor, goblins etc "non-archer-factions" benefit this situation already. Right now they abuse fellbeasts etc in a way that feels wrong. <__< As Dikey said, fellbeasts are just to cheap. I really like the brutal power attacks. It just makes taking some monsters worthwhile. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|