Re: [Epic]Orky Flavoured E40K [Long]

From: J. Michael Looney <mlooney_at_...>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 09:55:15 -0500

Erik K. Rutins wrote:
>
> Alan,
>
> Another fantastic post!
>
> I'll try to make a few intelligent comments... :-) I apologize if I've
> missed the answers to some of these - been a bit frazzled lately.
>
> > Medic - Cost 10 - add +1 to Die Roll for BM Removal
>
> What Imperial detachments can buy this option? Just Space Marines, or
> IG as well. This must be designated as a model on a stand, right - so
> if the stand goes, so does the ability...

IG, SM, Nuns-with-Guns

>
> > Repair - Cost 10 - give any one non-War-Engine unit in the
> > detachment a save
> > Chaplain - Cost 10 - add +1 to Die Roll for Leadership Test
>
> So I could make a Space Marine Captain stand that cost 80 points, gave
> me a d6 to roll for blast markers, a +1 for leadership tests and a save
> on my command land raider. Hehehe. All in all it seems flavourful and
> balanced given that I just have to fail one save to lose those 80 points
> and neat abilities. Might foster spreading the chaplain, techmarine,
> etc. around the detachment to prevent a one shot loss of the entire
> command staff. With Bart's permission, we'll playtest this tomorrow.

That would be a good ides, (spreading stuff around that is)
>
> > Goffic Rockers as Boyz + Chaplain
>
> Are you serious? A mobile Ork rock band that boosts morale? This
> sounds fun.

Yes it does. Are you ready to rock there Matt me boy?


> > Shokk AttackGun 10 1 90 0 4+
>
> This would have to be playtested, it might be better to make it 60cm.
> In the context of Volcano Cannons being only 60cm and all - only the
> Ordinatus and Deathstrikes get this kind of range.
>

And IG artillery. The SAG is a line of site weapon. If you can see it
you should be able to hit it, at least according to the "holy fluff"

> > Possessed Wdboy 10 1 30 4 4+ Save,Psyker
>
> As in 'possessed by warp creature', 'possessed by Gork', what?

> > Transportas 25 0 NA 1 5+ Transport(3)
> > (Includes the old wheeled battlewagon, without turret a la original
> > WH40K one)
 
> This seems like a reasonable differentiation. Don't see any reason why
> it wouldn't work. I don't follow the Transport(3) choice though. First
> off, why change the 'hitching a lift' rule? Second, 2 would seem
> reasonable based on the size of battlewagons. 3 seems a bit much,
> particularly given that only one stand can hitch a lift. OTOH, I
> haven't seen the model you mention.
>

Because that what they could carried in SM-2. In WH40K (RT+supplements)
they could carry as many figures as you could fit on the model with out
falling off. This is not a joke. Ork really do "just pile on" to their
transport.


> > Speed Armour HoloField Damage Assault Specials
> > 25 5 2+ Save 6 12
>
> Holo-Field? Sheesh, what else do ya want? ;-) How did this work in 2nd
> Ed? Would the Orks really have a holo-field as good as the eldar one?
> If so, why don't they use it elsewhere?

2nd Ed Mekboy Gargants were, well, weird. Holofield would work here
because
1) It comes close to the effect of the 2nd Ed version and
2) Don't have to write a new set of rules.

-- 
Sillyness is the last refuse of the doomed.  P. Opus
--
Geek code: GAT d-- s:-- a C+++ UL++ P+ L++ !E- W+++ N++ o K++ w+++ !o
!M-- !V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP t++ 5+ X R+++ tv+ b++++ DI++++ D G++ e+
h---(*)
r+++ y+++(**)
http://www.spellbooksoftware.com
Received on Mon Sep 22 1997 - 14:55:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Oct 22 2019 - 13:09:53 UTC