November 25 2020 00:07:12
Navigation
Forum Threads
Newest Threads
· Evolution of the Ork
· Homebrew "edition"
· Insane e-bay auctions
· Interlude with a Vam...
· Greetings!
Hottest Threads
· Special Character... [16]
· What is your bigg... [14]
· Detachment system [13]
· That useless unit... [11]
Latest Articles
· THE GODS OF CHAOS HA...
· Posting Content on t...
· A word on Attachments
· Final Testing and Bu...
Users Online
· Guests Online: 1

· Members Online: 0

· Total Members: 263
· Newest Member: AnomanderRake
Welcome
Welcome to Classic Hammer
View Thread
Classic Hammer » Warhammer Fantasy » 6th Edition
Ridden Monsters
Yes I take them, and they are worth it Yes I take them, and they are worth it 20%[2 Votes]
Yes I take them, but find them lacking Yes I take them, but find them lacking 60%[6 Votes]
No I don't, but I feel they are worth it No I don't, but I feel they are worth it 10%[1 Vote]
No I don't, and find them lacking No I don't, and find them lacking 10%[1 Vote]
Total Votes : 10
 Print Thread
Ridden Monsters - Yes or no?
Just Tony
Pretty straight forward, do you take them and do you feel they do their job for their points?

I wind up making a monster mount character for each army I play, but find I only run them every now and then. I'm discovering that they are barely mobile enough to hunt war machines, and that the Terror bomb works less than a third of the time. I also have a shining experience where my High Elf Lord on Dragon couldn't take out a Hero level Chaos character on steed ON THE CHARGE. So in short, I like them, but feel they don't really hold up to what I think they should do.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
HidaSeku
I definitely take them, and definitely find them lacking.

I tried to get my Empire General on Griffon to work well for 2 editions (7th & 8th) and all he ever did was give up points. Still kept trying because I love the miniature and the concept!

Had some similar results with my Saurus Oldblood on Carnosaur, but at least he had a few games where the dinosaur caused havoc haha

Never got Terror bomb to work for me, but had it work against me plenty of times. There was a stretch of poor dice-rolling games on my part in the middle of 7th edition where my opponents would make harder Leadership rolls than the ones I would fail. It was a rough time, for sure!
 
TinyLegions
Assuming that you are not using the rule of cool, in larger games of a minimum of 3K, they have their uses. Any games smaller than that and it really turns into a point sink in my experience.
Your Benevolent dictator

My Miniatures Blog http://www.tinyle...gspot.com/
 
Just Tony
Speaking of rule of cool, I always wanted to do a War of the Beard list with a unit of Dragon Princes. What do you folks think would be the best option modelwise? I was leaning towards Asarnil, since his dragon is smaller than the current one, but I also thought about those Phoenix things. Thoughts?
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
jonathan e
I'm biased against them because I play Tomb Kings (who don't get the option) and Vampire Counts (for whom they're deathtraps). In the latter case I really don't want to strap my extremely important army-supporting "shoot here for big victory points and an army-wrecking effect" linchpin to the back of a Large Target, off the back of which they're rather likely to be shot.

It also drives me crackers that so few of the monster-mounted characters even had a proper figure for the dismounted version that you'd invariably need in a lot of your games!

I might be in the minority here but I think the tail end of eighth edition and even Age of Sigmar did these models right by saying they were one kit, they'd have one statline, and there'd be no more of this prannying around with "oh that random wizard on the 20mm base is Arkhan, he just lost his chariot/big flying skeleton horse thing". It just seems like a rational solution from a company which was normally very happy to let the product range dictate the shape of the rules, but got stuck on this aspect for years and years.
Warhammer transmissions at Malediction Games

OG sixth edition: 20 / 6 / 21
comeback tour: 5 / 0 / 4
 
https://maledicton.games
MattyFenby
It definitely seems like a blown opportunity for them to not make you buy a little bundle with each characters mounted and on foot version.

We allow breath weapons to be used in Stand and Shoot and even Close Combat after watching GoT.

Even with this addition, to be honest we have found Dragons to be a little over priced. Against a low LD army, however, the Terror bomb should NOT be underestimated. Like Tony mentioned though, vs a high LD army that is only going to work so often and for the amount of points there may not be enough returns to justify the cost.

Maybe this is why playing the Terror/Fear rules the stickler way (2 tests from short range) makes monsters better for punishing out of position units? I still dont like 2 Tests from short range with only one from long range though, doesnt sit right with me...
 
jonathan e
I'll have to look at the terror thread. I don't generally like to stickle, but as a lifelong Undead player I feel obliged to weaponise the psychology rules because my army's built around them to such a degree. Not the attitude I like to bring to every conversation, y'know?

I've been tempted by the terror bomb but only when the bomber is disposable. Give me a 3000 point game or some nice fifth edition where anyone can hop on the back of the flying nasty and it becomes a lower risk strategy that can afford to fail. I also find that most armies have decent enough Leadership to weather it unless I go all out putting Doom and Darkness on the General or something, which isn't an option I can guarantee.
Warhammer transmissions at Malediction Games

OG sixth edition: 20 / 6 / 21
comeback tour: 5 / 0 / 4
 
https://maledicton.games
Just Tony
I don't want to discourage you from the read, don't get me wrong, but I can sum up what kicked it off...

In one of the BatReps on this site I was obligated to a Terror bomb and had it in my mind that I was going to charge said Terror causing unit. Since "Start Of The Turn" and "Movement" are two different phases, I took a Terror test due to proximity, and a Fear test to charge. I failed the Fear test and it started a rather in depth debate in the BatRep thread, so the bossman here separated the Fear/Terror discussion to a separate thread.
Father, soldier, musician, Transformers fan, masochistic junior moderator type thing.
 
Brr-icy
Depends, i tend to take them because i love their models, but if you play them wrong, they suck. But i have played where you drop them down and cascade terror fleeing occurs and wins the game for you.
 
Brr-icy
jonathan e wrote:

I'll have to look at the terror thread. I don't generally like to stickle, but as a lifelong Undead player I feel obliged to weaponise the psychology rules because my army's built around them to such a degree. Not the attitude I like to bring to every conversation, y'know?

I've been tempted by the terror bomb but only when the bomber is disposable. Give me a 3000 point game or some nice fifth edition where anyone can hop on the back of the flying nasty and it becomes a lower risk strategy that can afford to fail. I also find that most armies have decent enough Leadership to weather it unless I go all out putting Doom and Darkness on the General or something, which isn't an option I can guarantee.


5th was very silly in that regard, add in flying high and undead became unstoppable. I liked 4th and 5th, played the hell out of them, but i always felt at an advantage whenever i played. Up until recently i played only undead/ vampire counts/ tomb kings. Now i play whatever, tending not to play my undead because i gave a better win/loss ratio with them and i want my opponents to have fun too, especially when i am teaching them to play lol
 
jonathan e
Brr-icy wrote:
5th was very silly in that regard, add in flying high and undead became unstoppable. I liked 4th and 5th, played the hell out of them, but i always felt at an advantage whenever i played. Up until recently i played only undead/ vampire counts/ tomb kings. Now i play whatever, tending not to play my undead because i gave a better win/loss ratio with them and i want my opponents to have fun too, especially when i am teaching them to play lol


I quite agree. Back when I played fifth I don't think I got my Lord of Change onto the table more than once, and never had a flying monster in any other army, so it was only in the last few years that I came to understand just how good Flying High was.

I have always played Undead and always will but I agree they're a terrible army to teach with: they don't interact with the rules in the same way as anything else and dropping a grimoire full of exceptions onto a player in their very first game isn't good pedagogy. (I used to teach, and used to write teaching theory for even longer, and will bang on about proximal development until the sky falls in if you'll let me - basically you don't expect people to learn everything all at once.)
Warhammer transmissions at Malediction Games

OG sixth edition: 20 / 6 / 21
comeback tour: 5 / 0 / 4
 
https://maledicton.games
Jump to Forum:
Login
Username

Password



Not a member yet?
Click here to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one here.
Member Poll
There are no polls defined.
Shoutbox
You must login to post a message.

No messages have been posted.
1,507,073 unique visits
Table 'cmvogan_phpf1.phpf_new_users' doesn't exist