Jump to content

Qwyksilver

+2 CP for Friendly Discussion

Recommended Posts

I like the 10 or MD idea for gettin off friendly spells.

I wouldn't mind a chance for critical success on regular heals. Maybe roll and on a 0 or 9 and 0 heal 2.

 

You could put some risk in it and on a 1 you wound 1 2-8 heal 1 9&0 heal 2. roll is optional?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason for even having the +2 is to make some spells easier to cast than others, why not take the plunge and put dificulty modifiers on the spells cards? Spells that it's felt are too hard to get off could get a positive modifier, and powerful spells that are harder to get off get a negative modifier. It should be much easier to control the implications this way instead of giving a blanket +2 on all friendly spells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care if the +2 comes back or not but I think if Mages can buy equipment that gives them +2 then clerics should be able to also or get an equal bonus through the friendly +2, or they could make clerics with cp's that compared to Mages.

 

I disagree with the arguments about Healer, because unless you are a Crusader and and have a handful of figs with healer it is pretty useless. Most games only last a few rounds and Clerics are loaded with spells that cost points so most player feel they need to use them. I for one don't want to waste my combat action healing one point of damage when there is a spell that heals three or a spell that causes three points damage. I play dwarfs and I generally don't ever use the Captain/cleric as a healer for two reasons: he can cast when out of range of the battle and he is a tank in melee. Using his healer is just a waste. Healer was much more powerful before all the damage tracks, now it is a gimmick.

 

I think also everyone is forgetting that there are other uses for friendly spells, there are about a dozen other spells other than cure that affect friendly models.

 

 

The reason for even having the +2 is to make some spells easier to cast than others, why not take the plunge and put dificulty modifiers on the spells cards? Spells that it's felt are too hard to get off could get a positive modifier, and powerful spells that are harder to get off get a negative modifier. It should be much easier to control the implications this way instead of giving a blanket +2 on all friendly spells.

 

I think since we have to buy spells having some that are hard to get off is a bit unfair, unless you give negitive modifiers to the mage spells also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just post some ideas that I think would go farther to helping clerics than bringing back a dead rule.

  • Give clerics a magic item all their own. Allow it to have +2 CP, and some other useful modifier, like +DV or +innate(Bless).
  • Give them more diverse spells.
    • Something to protect nearby allies against Ranged attacks... Grant Deflect/6 to all friendly models within 3"
    • Something to protect against magic, +4 MD. Have this cast like chain lightning.

    [*]Fixing Dispel Magic to make it more useful and castable defensively.

    • I like that Mages/Clerics are seperate in how they defend against magic. But make both spells equally useful.
    • Make Dispel cancel out every part of a spell, except Damage. Allow CounterSpell to stop damage only.

...snip...

 

I disagree with the arguments about Healer, because unless you are a Crusader and and have a handful of figs with healer it is pretty useless. Most games only last a few rounds and Clerics are loaded with spells that cost points so most player feel they need to use them. I for one don't want to waste my combat action healing one point of damage when there is a spell that heals three or a spell that causes three points damage. I play dwarfs and I generally don't ever use the Captain/cleric as a healer for two reasons: he can cast when out of range of the battle and he is a tank in melee. Using his healer is just a waste. Healer was much more powerful before all the damage tracks, now it is a gimmick.

 

...snip...

I think this is a matter of play style. If you want to take the risk of buying 20-40 point spells with a chance of them failing, then that option is available. Some prefer the cheaper, slow rate but auto success format of Healer. Niether way is better. They are just two options to accomplish a similar task.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the way I see it:

 

In general the disparity between Mage CPs and cleric CPs has been removed, previously there was a much tighter cap on cleric CPs because the +2 friendly modifier meant that (with the standard DC of 10) high CP clerics could auto-cast healing spells. The problem with this was that limiting cleric CPs meant they really couldn't be used very effectively in an offensive manner for the most part.

 

I'm against the idea of a +2 friendly modifier, simply because it means even CP 5 and 6 clerics have only a very minor chance of failing their CP checks when using Cure spells, and high level CP casters will autocast Cure spells. It makes Cure spells too dominant, and turns clerics only into Cure casters (as they appeared to largely be in the previous edition).

 

The new Datacards have seen many clerics boosted up to a higher CP, making them just as effective Cure spell casters, and also pretty decent offensive spell casters (A look at the Crusader list reveals some pretty hefty CP increases). But one of the problems is that MDs of many soldier models also jumped with the new Datacards.

 

THe big problem is that the +1 or +2 CP increase seen in the Crusader list to make up for the friendly modifier, didn't carry over to every list. In particular 4 mainstay clerics in the game stand out as really having been left out: Ivar, Niriodel, Ombur, and Gonda (along with the 3 Merc Clerics as well).

 

One might argue that the Crusaders are a Divine list, and that their ability to cast clerical magic at such high level CPs helps make them special. I wouldn't agree, from a divine perspective what makes the Crusaders special is the sheer amount of Divine magic that can be brought into play by them; so I would disagree with the notion that other factions shouldn't have a mainstay cleric that is equal to Halbarad in casting abilities.

 

So in my opinion, rather than a +2 friendly modifier, the quickest fix would be to give a +1 CP bump to Ivar, Niriodel, Ombur, and Gonda.

 

As it stands (With current CPs), many clerics are somewhat undesirable not just because of their ability to cast spells, but because Reaper has decided to make them pay a premium price to cast spells. Clerical offensive magic is more expensive than Wizardly magic, and in general has a shorter Range. I don't disagree with this choice, as failure to do so would amek Offensive minded Mages an unappealing choice. However I think Reaper may have gone too far.

 

I think another aspect that could be changed to make them more appealing would be to simply cheapen some of their spells slightly. I'm speaking specifically of a handful of useful spells that arn't cost effective in my mind (many cleric spells are very worthwhile):

 

Slow

At 10 points this spell really isn't appealing to me, it has great range (unlike many cleric spells), but it isn't cost effective. I'm being asked to spend 10 points and to use a combat action to cast (with the possibiliy of failing) this spell. The Mage spell 'Rigor Mortis' is a 5 point spell that causes the target to lose both actions. Granted, it is faction specific, and a grade 2 spell, but it is half the cost of 'Slow' and more than twice as effective (causing the loss of combat, and non-combat actions, giving attackers +1 MAV, and disallowing defensive strikes). So why not make Slow a 5 point spell instead of a 10 point one, I might be inclined to slap a slow spell or two on some of my cheap clerics (Conlan, Lorena, or Gonda perhaps).

 

Dispel

I'd be alot happier if this was a 10 point spell, given that Counter-spell costs only 10 points, and that many of the lingering spell effects that can be cast (Rigor Mortis, Stun, Shell of the Coffin, Aspect of the Hunter, Divine Vigor, Blessing, Slow, Crimson Embrace, Burst of Speed, Sand Storm) are all fairly cheap, and many carry over multiple turns, so your opponent is likely to have at least gotten some benefit from them prior to you being able to dispel them. I know the difference between 15 and 10 points isn't alot, but it might be enough to get players to take this spell.

 

Hold

I see no reason at all for this spell to be twice as expensive as Stun, with only 2/3rds the range. I know offensive clericl spells need to carry a bit of a premium cost, and that their range is generally shorter, but I can't ever see taking a Hold spell, when I can take a mage with a Stun spell instead. 20 points, keeping range 12 would make this alot more appealing, or 25 with a boost to range 18. You're double crippling the appeal of Hold by charging twice as much as the Mage spell that does the same job, and cutting the range down substantially.

 

Searing Pain

Once again, limited range compared to Bolt, and 3 times the cost. Make this a 10 point spell. Or keep it at 15 and make it do 2 points of damage (still 5 point more than Ice SHards, costing you a level 2 spell slot, unlike Ice SHards level 1, and having a shorter range).

 

Warcry

Warcry used to be pretty cool, now it totaly sucks. Typically one thinks of it as an innate Tomukh spell, and in that capacity it isn't worth using at all given the CP 2 of innate casters. To keep it's effectiveness why not make innate casting CP 4, as it stands Warcry is the only Innate spell in the game using the default CP of 2 (Nightspectre has it's own CP). Do this and I'll approve alot more of this spell, granted it's still annoying that enemy models are raised with the same chance as friendly ones, but that's what CdG is for. I've always loved Warcry, but I think it's fairly hampered in it's current form.

 

I really believe a change to the above 5 spells, would make clerics alot more worthwhile. The new spells available havegiven them the ability to be so much more than Cure castings, making them more utility casters. But low CPs for certain factions clerics, and too high a points premium for offensive clerical spells, combined with short Ranges, makes it unlikely that players will use Clerics, or use them outside of a given role.

 

It's too easy right now to slap only Cure spells, Divine Vigor, and Blessings on a Cleric, because you know you are shooting for CP 10's when casting these. It's alot more difficult and daunting a choice when you have a CP 5 or 6 cleric to spend 30 points on a Hold spell Given that many mainstay soldiers in the game have MD 11 or 12 (I think Reaper may have gone overboard in some of these MD increases). Reptus and Dwarves are all MD 12, Crusaders and Nefsokar are MD 11+(Khamsin and Ivy Crown aside).

 

This means if I take Ombur and use a Hold spell against a cluster of 3 Reptus Warriors I need to roll a 7+ to Hold any of them, meaning more times than not I'm likely to only succeed holding a single model unless i'm lucky, or if I'm slightly unlucky I might not Hold any. Is that worth investing 61 points in Ombur, and a further 30 points on a Hold spell? I dunno, but if that Hold spell cost 20-25 points, and I could cast it on 6+ (50/50 chance for each one) I'd possibly consider it a worthwhile shot.

 

 

 

Anyway, enough ranting. Previous editions had me talking about how limited low level Mages were, now I've flip flopped to clerics :) They arn't too bad off, but I'd like to see them slightly more appealing. I'd hate to see clerics relegated to Healing and Curing with the occassional Bless and Divine Vigor when then there are far more options for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i havent seen the poll yet, its probably in a thread i havent looked at yet. But, as far as the +2 for friendlies go, my overall opinion is..

 

I understand the point of Warlord is to be offensive and to move the game along by destroying things. Not to spend all day healing things and keeping them alive all day long. Having said that, I think that goal is acheived already by the increase in MAs and MAVs that we have seen across the board.

 

Mages also further this concept by having relatively cheap spells that can inflict lots of damage, AND other than bad rolling, the only thing that can counter a mage spell, is another mage with a counter spell spell.

 

Unfortunately the clerics, which should be the one area that goes against this trend with ther healing abilities, are also supporting this concept due to the fact that they cost more per CP, spells cost more per DT, are less affective per point, have less range, and clerics as a whole also have less CP.

 

I dont necessarily know that a blanket +2 to friendlies is the answer, but if nothing else is done, I think it is a fair band aid to the problem. I would prefer to be able to give my clerics greater magic upgrades. And have 18 inch ranges on most of their spells like the mages. And I really would like to have one of those familiars so I could not worry so much if a heal 4 spell fails, that I could try again next turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Besides, no matter what the bonus I give my clerics they always botch the spell, why increase my opponents chances?

 

Best. Reason. Evar!

 

:lol:

 

PS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thought is this: if the primary reason for bringing back the +2CP Friendly Bonus is for helping out the cure spells, and if the Healer SA given to most clerics is supposed to make up for cure spells being harder to cast, AND if the complaints about this are because Healer only heals one track in a game where everything has multiple tracks, then why not instead add an equipment upgrade that boosts Healer so it heals two tracks instead of one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and turns clerics only into Cure casters (as they appeared to largely be in the previous edition).

 

That is exactly what I want a cleric to be. I dont want my clerics to be offensive. That is what I have mages and all the archers and melee models for. Clerics are for keeping them upright. And every once in a while throwing an unexpected curveball at the enemy (like with holy light)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went through and did an average of all the level 3 casters. Mages average about 7.5 and clerics 6.5, seems pretty even except that mages can get another +2, making the average 9.5. While clerics can only take a +1, making them 7.5. Then you add in that cleric spells are usually inferior or more expensive.

 

I don't really care how it is handled but I would like to see a little more level ground between the two. I mainly play Dwarfs and Reven, so I rely on clerics and not mages. If clerics are -2cp lower than mages, then why is it unfair to give them at least an equal chance as a mage on friendly spells?

 

If Reaper is against the game being drawn out with healing then they should nerf it, but then they should nerf vampires and life drains and all the mage type "healing".

 

My complaint is mainly based on balance. I am not a big magic user. I don't even take a cleric in most of my Dwarf lists and can't remember the last time Margara was on the table... at least six monthes ago. I do take several clerics in my Bull lists but they generally are there for Aspect of the Hunter and I have never fielded my Yagun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a discussion where I can argue both sides. Every time I come up with a reason to re-introduce the +2, I come up with a counter argument for it, so I've deleted and re-typed my post about 3 times so far.

 

I think it boils down to this. How effective do you want healing to be? Cheap spells like Aspect of the hunter aren't such a big deal if you lose the spell. But losing a 30 point Cure 3 really hurts because you can't help but think, I could have placed another warrior model on the table for those points instead of the incompetant cleric.

 

So either make the clerics more competant like they used to be, and expect healing to be more widely used, or leave things as they are, and expect only the more competant clerics to buy spells, why others hardly ever get fielded. For what it's worth, I'd rather see the former than the latter.

 

The poll doesn't really give a third option, but there are some. Introduce some cleric only items, that are cheap but give more than one benefit, like a holy armor that gives +1 CP and +1 DV for a bargain 20 points, or a shamanic talisman that allows a reroll on failed spells for 20 points.

 

Oh and just to muddy things up a bit more, you could change the +2 vs friendly to +1 vs friendly. Coupled with the relatively cheap familiar, this bumps up most CP 5 casters up to a CP 7, which gives reasonable reliability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thought I had that should/could be looked at is what the casters are trying to beat as well. As rgtriplec pointed out mages are (with greater familiars) a 9.5 average and clerics are 7.5, but what are these guys having to roll to get the spell off? I know that for clerics you are looking at 2.5, but a comparison of all the MDs of models might need to be looked at. If mages are needing to roll 2.5s with their 9.5 average CP then that seems pretty much in line to me, but if mages only need 1-1.5 then it might be a bit out of line.

 

Just an idea. I don't have the energy to go comparing all the MDs of all the models.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and turns clerics only into Cure casters (as they appeared to largely be in the previous edition).

 

That is exactly what I want a cleric to be. I dont want my clerics to be offensive. That is what I have mages and all the archers and melee models for. Clerics are for keeping them upright. And every once in a while throwing an unexpected curveball at the enemy (like with holy light)

 

The wide choice in spells that have appeared, along with the myriad of Cure spells and the inclusion of Healer means you can have your clerics as dominant healers, while I can have my clerics as utility units that cast a variety of spells. We both win...still it would be nice if both of our spells worked a little more often (especially when we're on our first damage track).

 

As for average MDs, it's really hard to say, it largely depends on the army you face. MD 10's vs. Reven, yet you'll need MD 12's vs. Dwarves.

 

If you want an average you're likely looking at MD 11 for soldier models and 12 for most characters.

 

Are people routinely dropping the points for a GMF? Sounds like everyone is assuming you'll buy the upgrade when you field a Mage. 40 points is pretty hefty, I can see it on some casters, But I wouldn't be putting it on things like Railor, on a caster like him, or CP5-6 casters I don't want to upgrade I'll just drop cheapon spells I can afford to have not work that might help out in a pinch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×