CliffNotes: a short post, foreshadowing a discussion point to be explored over the next few months.
I've said before I think most everyone out there is talking out their SELF-EDIT (booty) when they make predictions about the future of the game. The new edition is a huge change, and the influx of new magic items, the renovation of the Lores, and the percentile system for army composition has changed things so much it will take time for us - all of us - to get a grip on what the game will become.
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want anyone to stop talking! The conversation is what's interesting - we'll get to the future soon enough.
It seems the first prediction made, this coming from the uber-competitive, optimized-list crowd...
...you know, they swim in the blue shark tank and eat the flesh of the weak (as well as the flesh of the week it seems)...
...was that everyone would run a large number of Wizards, to the exclusion of everything else. The top lists would have two Level 4's and a smattering of lesser lights. Nothing else would be able to compete.
There's no knock intended here, 'cause these are my people, too - but I never bought that for a moment. I've maintained from week one that magic has a point of diminishing returns. I'm willing to concede that some armies have reliable ways of pushing up the number of Power Dice each turn, making the strategy less reliant on the random nature of the Winds of Magic and thus workable, but I don't think this is going to be the best route for most armies.
There's no doubt every decent list will have a Wizard component of some sort, even if it is only defensive in nature, but what else will it have? We're not counting the General; traditionally he's a choppy character, but he can be anyone.
Some armies absolutely require a Battle Standard Bearer, and this more than anything else is overlooked by the spamming magic crowd. The Zombie Master said something to the effect of he's willing to take the Leadership tests, because that is part of the game. I understand where he's coming from but that's a blanket statement: some armies simply can't take that kind of chance.
So really that leaves the choppy hero. Jive Professor, who writes for everyone these days, wrote a fantastic article on Blood of Kittens - check it out.
I'm not answering questions today, simply asking what I believe will be the important question moving forward: what will the characters look like? Will an army...
Take 50% of its value in Lords and Heroes? Will that be in numerous baby-sitters or in one powerful Lord? Will an army spam choppy or magic? Will an army go another direction and purchase only the minimum Heroes required and spend the points on Troops, Special, or Rare?
I think it will be all of the above, but I really believe 8th Edition is a game of balance and will reward an army that builds balanced lists. Still, I don't know for sure, so as I continue my study of the game, these are the things I'll be thinking about. Hopefully I can learn a thing or three to improve my game.
I'd settle for being able to beat Little Barrera.
It's gonna come down to how your army operates and what you want your characters to do.
ReplyDeleteI think my Skaven will be fine with2 Grey Seers because I can use warpstone tokens to buff my PD and because most of my spells only require 1 or 2 dice to go thanks to my lovely +4 to cast.
My Daemons and whatever I decide between DE/HE will be different. No clue how I'm doing the Beasts.
Magic is important, but it isn't the be-all end-all. My last game, we consistently rolled 5 or so PD each magic phase, so we ended up not using too much of it. Fighty characters can always be fighty.
My demons at 2500 will probably run 2 level 2 heralds and the blue scribes to maximize power dice gain.
ReplyDeleteThe scribes ability to generate power dice independently of the Winds roll should be handy.
I think there will also be a choppy herald of khorn in there as well.
Currently working under the distribution theory, multiple smaller characters and more units rather than the smaller unit count and uber character theory.