# You hate named/special characters?



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

I've seen this pop up on forums and in person. There are players who hate when their opponents field special/named characters.

One of them was pissed at me because Kharn raped his entire squad of Death Company. Quite naturally, Kharn is now overpowered in his mind. After losing the game to me, part of the excuse was that _he_ didn't bring any named characters.

Most named characters are definitely not overpowered... quite a few aren't worth their points cost.

Is it the perceived lack of originality? Is it that you think they're blatantly overpowered?

Just curious, I love the discussions we have on this forum so I just wanted to start another. I personally don't care either way; I'd just like to hear what you all have to say on this subject.

:drinks:


----------



## Moriouce (Oct 20, 2009)

I love them! It is just to bad so few are worth taking. I play harder when bringing one and it makes it more fun trying to kill that special character. It is a win all in its own. 

Your friend sound like a bad looser and Kharn was there to take the heat. 

I just wish that all named characters where balanced so that you saw more of them.


----------



## iamtheeviltwin (Nov 12, 2012)

Speaking as an old player who has had to adjust to 6ed I can give you the reasons that I tend to avoid named characters.

The first is that when I played (2ed/3ed) you had to have "permission" to play special characters, so I got used to never playing with them. It is just a matter of personal preference. I have found this opinion fading though as I have become more embroiled in the current game.

The second is a matter of personal playstyle. If you look at my armies I try to build around my own themes and style of play. I find few special characters fit my wants in combination of wargear, powers, and play. There are a few I do use, Maugan Ra and Khorso Khan, but both fit into the armies that I play them with. As good as Asurman or Vulkan might be they aren't in the style of my army.

Finally, it can be a matter of the fluff. Some people take the game very seriously in a narrative style and if Kharn is running around in every small skirmish they play it could be hard to fit him into the mental picture. Even though I run Khan, I run him as a proxy for the Master of the Hunt in my own marine chapter...not as Khan. I also tend to avoid running named characters in small games (for fluff reasons as much as points).

Now my opinion on the matter has changed and softened as I play more 6ed and really I have no problem now if my opponent wants to run Special Characters...even if I am hesitant to run them myself.


As for your opponent, that sounds like sour grapes. Although the load-outs may not always be ideal most named characters are more powerful than a normal character of the same point cost via whatever special rules or unique wargear they posses. This means you have to treat them differently...It can sometimes come as a surprise to an unprepared opponent when the special character performs above and beyond what they expect from that type of character (i.e. "what do you mean Magnus is better than a regular Chapter Master")


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

They used to be opponent's-permission-only, but that changed in 5th edition where Special Characters became a more fundamental part of the game.

Often, you can make a nastier character from the basic HQs. Kharn is not *that* much better than a Lord with Axe of Blind Fury and maybe a Juggernaught.

But I can count the really strong special characters on my extremities and have some spare. Most of them are good at best, more often underwhelming or downright bad.


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

MidnightSun said:


> Kharn is not *that* much better than a Lord with Axe of Blind Fury and maybe a Juggernaught.


Sometimes I have both in my army:victory:. Those always make for very fun games. In the game described in my OP, Kharn turned into a Spawn after annihilating my opponent's Reclusiarch. That was a hilarious outcome which I'll never forget.

I didn't know about the "permission for named characters" rule of old. Makes sense that veteran players have that lingering feeling about them.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

The only special character that is/was even vaguely powerful is/was Mephiston, and even he had answers such as Plasma.

Anyone who pisses and moans about SCs in this edition of the game is either nursing a holdover from about a decade ago (when they were actually unreasonably overpowered) or has no idea how to actually play the game.


----------



## Stormxlr (Sep 11, 2013)

If it exists you can use it ,thats my logic. Who the hell are you to tell me that I can't use the model i bought, built and painted... unless you are my girlfriend.

If you remove special characters from Dark Angel dex it would basically invalidate the much of the army builds and make it just another vanilla marine army. 
If my opponent brought 2 baneblades hell ye i wanna play that, but be fair about the game lets make a special scenario and let me make it fair by beefing up my army.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Sethis said:


> The only special character that is/was even vaguely powerful is/was Mephiston, and even he had answers such as Plasma.


I'm not really sure what you mean here. Do you mean powerful as in beating people up? In which case, Mephiston's hardly the lord of beatsticks (damn good, to be sure, but I'd rather fight him than Abaddon or the Swarmlord).

I assume you don't mean powerful as in how strong an option they are and how good their abilities are, because I know you know that Sliscus, Coteaz and, I dunno, maybe Logan Grimnar are really strong choices despite being merely 'ok' in a fight.


----------



## Stormxlr (Sep 11, 2013)

MidnightSun said:


> I'm not really sure what you mean here. Do you mean powerful as in beating people up? In which case, Mephiston's hardly the lord of beatsticks (damn good, to be sure, but I'd rather fight him than Abaddon or the Swarmlord).
> 
> I assume you don't mean powerful as in how strong an option they are and how good their abilities are, because I know you know that Sliscus, Coteaz and, I dunno, maybe Logan Grimnar are really strong choices despite being merely 'ok' in a fight.


Sadly i have not had a chance to face those, but i found Belial with sword to be quite amazing melee character. Midnight since you also play DA how do you place him against those characters?
DWA Belial with group of knights at right position can turn the tide of the game or completely end it in my favour. With good dice rolling you can slaughter everything in your path.


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

I'm fine with them, I do hate things like marbo though, but that has nothing to do with his name, just that he's a 'remove one squad' button for guard and at dirt cheap.
But they can be cool and give me a surprise when I find out a speacial rule they have and I'm 'hmm, cool but he's dead... Sorry' like we I challenged a tau battle suit with my sergeant, then found out he had an onager gauntlet as he bitch slapped me into the floor... That was fun and it didn't stop my termie sarg wipe out the whole squad next turn- he killed 3 crisis squads, one a body guard with commander in as many turns


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Stormxlr said:


> Sadly i have not had a chance to face those, but i found Belial with sword to be quite amazing melee character. Midnight since you also play DA how do you place him against those characters?
> DWA Belial with group of knights at right position can turn the tide of the game or completely end it in my favour. With good dice rolling you can slaughter everything in your path.


He's completely terrible without the Hammer/Shield, and 'blah' with it. 3 attacks at AP3, even with Fleshbane, just isn't doing enough damage to bother anybody in truth, and he's pretty easy to splat with a Power Fist or Monstrous Creatre. Sometimes he does cool stuff, but at the end of the day he's a 190pt Company Master with Terminator Armour, Thunder Hammer and Storm Shield (thankfully, his Master of the Deathwing and Tactical Precision rules mean he's only about 30/40pts overpriced, rather than being unusable). Knights, on the other hand, are amazing, so bring them and paste face all day.

No, amazing combat characters are actually fairly rare - without accounting for a way to get into combat or their other abilities (because some of these characters are amazing in melee, but can't actually get to the fight without being shot to shit in the process), I'd have to give the first place golden trophy to Skarbrand, hands down. Then most other super-characters from their respective books (Ghazghkull, the Swarmlord, Abaddon, Draigo, Mephiston) are pretty combat-competent too, but most stuff is pretty reasonable to deal with in melee, especially since you can usually gun them down before they ever get there.


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

I'm part of the gamer generation which dislikes special characters. Waaaaaaay back in 2nd ed they were ridiculously overpowered and rightly required the opponent's consent. I still remember those days vividly.

In addition I was always bothered by the armies which _ required _ a player to bring a personality to the field to play their army according to a particular army style. Even when "counting-as" it still bugs me that players are required to purchase HQs that way. Personalities should never be required to play a style within the army. In the current system "overpoweredness" doesn't really enter into it for me.


----------



## DkMiBuch (Feb 1, 2013)

It's not that I have anything against named characters per se, but I despise the fact that you have to field them, if you want to play a certain way. 
Take DA for example, like Stormxlr mentioned. You HAVE to bring Belial or whatever his name is, in order to play Death Wing. Why not just have some sort of upgrade for your commander to unlock them as troops?

It just seems so stupid that a Grey Knights army with Coteaz has a fair chance of facing off against another Grey Knights army using Coteaz.

I'm all for special characters for their battle skills, psychic powers e.g. But I truly hate it when they give your army bonuses, which you couldn't otherwise achieve.


----------



## serphangel (Feb 1, 2014)

I like special characters as I find they add flavour to a list. I do often find that you can build a better option though


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

Yeah, that makes sense. I can totally get behind being frustrated by needing a specific HQ. Huron comes to mind, for Infiltrate.

I guess it's cool that there's some element of randomness to Warlord traits and things like that, but I think I'm compelled to agree with the notion that there shouldn't be mandatory HQ to play a certain style. Not a reason to hate on another player, but as they say, the game.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

DkMiBuch said:


> It's not that I have anything against named characters per se, but I despise the fact that you have to field them, if you want to play a certain way.
> Take DA for example, like Stormxlr mentioned. You HAVE to bring Belial or whatever his name is, in order to play Death Wing. Why not just have some sort of upgrade for your commander to unlock them as troops?


Because a Company Master with Terminator Armour and the upgrade to make Deathwing Troops is Belial. He has exactly nothing special about him. He *IS* a basic Commander with the three optional weapon loadouts and an extra special rule.



DkMiBuch said:


> It just seems so stupid that a Grey Knights army with Coteaz has a fair chance of facing off against another Grey Knights army using Coteaz.


Granted, but there are a lot of Inquisitors out there with highly extensive rings of informants and henchmen. Coteaz' rules don't just work for one Inquisitor in the entire history of the galaxy.



DkMiBuch said:


> I'm all for special characters for their battle skills, psychic powers e.g. But I truly hate it when they give your army bonuses, which you couldn't otherwise achieve.


I think they're the best kind, otherwise they're not fulfilling the 'special' part of 'special character'. They'd just be generic HQ dudes with less flexibility (look at 8 out of the 9 Special Characters in the Farsight supplement, and tell me which ones you can honestly name from memory and would use outside of O'Vesa, who's only special because he lets you squash a Riptide into HQ).


----------



## The Irish Commissar (Jan 31, 2012)

One of my favorite characters to use is kanadres from the eldar codex. If he only had a invulable save he would be well away. The one guy i hate fighting but also using is Commissar yarrick he is such a pain but so funny to see get back up everytime :grin:


----------



## The Son of Horus (Dec 30, 2006)

I got started in this hobby when named characters were very much a "Hey, this is a cool model, and there are rules for it if you absolutely *must* use it, but mostly, they're just for display." The era of requiring your opponent's permission, stuff like that. And that still resonates with me to a certain degree.

I very rarely play with named characters, but it's more out of habit than anything else. I don't find them that interesting-- they feel like a concession to game design more than something that creates a stronger narrative (or, "forges a better narrative?") for the game. In recent years, it's felt like the presence of a named character makes a player's army less unique, and in some cases makes it outright identical to several other players'. 

Do I dislike seeing them across the table from me? Not really. It doesn't bother me one way or another in gameplay terms. I just find them boring. I tend to beat up armies that lean heavily on named characters much more readily than an original build. Named characters often dictate strategies, and when you know what your opponent is going to do (because their tactics are basically pre-written by the presence of a named character) you can exploit it.


----------



## Stormxlr (Sep 11, 2013)

@MidnightSun
technically, if you put it this way, almost all special characters are just beefed up normal commanders with special rules.
Sure there are some exceptions such as Avatar and Daemon Prince. 
But arent all Space Marines are the same? Some are just more excellent and become commanders/captains and if they continue they become leaders of the chapter. 
Yes I agree Belial is a bit bland, lacks in fluff, doesnt have much taste to him and bit more expensive than he should be.

Lets dissect him.
Belial comes with TDA, AP3 fleshbane sword and can be switched to TH/SS or 2 Lightning Claws for free, also a free Teleport Homer.
7 Special rules out of them 3 rules are unique to him;


 Tactical Precision (No Scatter for DS),
Grand Master of Deathwing (Deathwing Terminators are troops),
Marked for Retribution(precision shots on 5+), and also has The Hunt as a Warlord Trait.
 Total 190 PTs

Now a DA Company Master in Terminator Armor with SB/PS costs 130 points. Cant have Lightning Claws, or TH/SS, but can take Special Issue Wargear and Chapter Relics which compensates for that. Has an identical stat line. With Relic of Unforgiven and Mace of Redemption he costs 175 points and the mace is much better than the Sword of Silence Belial comes with. 

The only thing that makes him special are the 3 rules. Marked for Retribution is useless since most ppl run him with TH/SS and he is not a shoty character. 

Now that leaves me questioning how would you actually make him unique and useful? 

In DA book the most unique HQ would be Azrael due to assortment of Special rules and Wargear, however he is expensive and I never actually found him useful.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

too be fair, perhaps the best CC special character is Kharn, and it did indeed run roughshod over an equally CC oriented unit...so I can see how it can be seen as "over powered" and at the same time I can see a lascannon eliminate him from the game in one shot.



The Son of Horus said:


> Do I dislike seeing them across the table from me? Not really. It doesn't bother me one way or another in gameplay terms. I just find them boring. I tend to beat up armies that lean heavily on named characters much more readily than an original build. Named characters often dictate strategies, and when you know what your opponent is going to do (because their tactics are basically pre-written by the presence of a named character) you can exploit it.


I have a few special characters that I like to run; mostly it is Lucius in my NM leaning CSM warband.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

MidnightSun said:


> I'm not really sure what you mean here. Do you mean powerful as in beating people up? In which case, Mephiston's hardly the lord of beatsticks (damn good, to be sure, but I'd rather fight him than Abaddon or the Swarmlord).


Sorry, that was rather unclear. I meant "competitive and scary as hell to face on the tabletop". There are many other characters who are scary in melee, but either have problems reaching it (anything on foot without a Jump Pack) or surviving to reach it (any kind of large MC type thing that doesn't fly).

Coteaz and his ilk are toolboxey and useful, but not something for the opponent to bitch about being "overpowered". You see that comment more often addressed at something like Abbaddon, when they have failed to either 1. shoot him to death, 2. destroy his Land Raider, or 3. allowed him to get into assault range of an important unit (i.e. not a speedbump unit you threw in the way). Any of the above implies you have a sub-par list, or sub-par gaming skills and Special Characters are not the cause of either, so are therefore a poor target to aim your rage and frustration at.


----------



## Ravion (Nov 3, 2010)

I really don't have a problem with SC as long as the character fits the army's theme.


----------



## The Sturk (Feb 3, 2012)

9/10 Times in my Necron book, I use the vanilla Overlord, as none of the Named characters fit what I am looking for in my HQ. If I'm playing a large point game, I might field Imotekh just for the lightning storm potential, but even then, his use dwindles shortly after the storm ends. When compared to an Overlord, which will have Mindshackle Scarabs and a Warscythe, who will more likely than not, get his points back.

I'm aware that other armies have stronger and more useful named characters, but in general, they aren't overpowered for their points cost.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

People like to bitch. That pretty much sums up why people hate named/special characters. I mean with riptides, and allies floating around what possible reason can be given for not allowing these horrible point sinks in any game? Hell, even the dataslate ones get far to much flakk for what they are and can do.


----------



## DkMiBuch (Feb 1, 2013)

MidnightSun said:


> Because a Company Master with Terminator Armour and the upgrade to make Deathwing Troops is Belial. He has exactly nothing special about him. He IS a basic Commander with the three optional weapon loadouts and an extra special rule.


So what are you saying? That you shouldn't view Belial as a person, but as a normal commander with termi armour?
I don't care what his special combat skills are, I just fail to see the reasoning behind having this guy being the only way of playing Death Wing. 
I don't hate special characters, not at all. I just hate the fact, that they are the only way of using henchmen, purifiers and so on, as troops.
They are unique characters, meaning that only one exists in the universe. However when playing a tournament, you are likely to have a Huron vs Huron showdown, because people depend on him to infiltrate their troops.



MidnightSun said:


> Coteaz' rules don't just work for one Inquisitor in the entire history of the galaxy.


Am I understanding this correctly, that you are defending the notion of using "counts as" characters?
I totally agree that the rules shouldn't work for just one Inquisitor in the entire galaxy, but sadly those are the rules.

So I guess that in principle, I'd wish more people would just model their own Chapter Master in terminator armour, and having him use the rules of Belial, just to rid us of the ridiculousness that is opposing armies fielding the same guy, of which only one exists.


----------



## TechPr1est (Nov 6, 2011)

i really dont like Sicarius or Calgar

ill play an opponent who has them happily, but it really infuriates me when......


1. my opponent sits back calgar and basically orbital bombardments my army throughout the match
2. My Ork warlord is cut down by Sicarius' Cou de grace (though im not sure if thats still in the current sm codex)
3. my warlord is cut down before he can even swing
4. Sicarius grants his joined squad 'counter attack' 
5. Sicarius' stupid 4+ inv save
6. Sicarius' stupid 2+ armour

i also dont like either of them in fluff as well. to me Calgar looks like some idiot who somehow managed to gain control of the entire chapter, even though his name isnt even mentioned in the Horus Heresy. (i for some reason only respect those who survived the hh) 

and Sicarius is just a plain fucking hypocritical asswhole


----------



## Jacobite (Jan 26, 2007)

TechPr1est said:


> i also dont like either of them in fluff as well. to me Calgar looks like some idiot who somehow managed to gain control of the entire chapter, even though his name isnt even mentioned in the Horus Heresy. (i for some reason only respect those who survived the hh)


The only currently alive loyalist marine who survived the Heresy is Bjorn the Fellhanded and he is in sleepy land 99% of the time in his big walking metal coffin. Indeed the only marine who is over 1000 years old is Dante. 

That said fuck both those UM cunts. Prissy arrogant wankers. If they kept their second founding chapters in line then the likes of the Minotaurs wouldn't need to lay the smack down every once in a while.


----------



## Stormxlr (Sep 11, 2013)

Jacobite said:


> The only currently alive loyalist marine who survived the Heresy is Bjorn the Fellhanded and he is in sleepy land 99% of the time in his big walking metal coffin. Indeed the only marine who is over 1000 years old is Dante.
> 
> That said fuck both those UM cunts. Prissy arrogant wankers. If they kept their second founding chapters in line then the likes of the Minotaurs wouldn't need to lay the smack down every once in a while.


Ye exactly, look at the Dark Angels. Proper hierarchy,all successor chapter answer directly to the Supreme Grandmaster Azrael no one steps out of the line unless he permits it.


----------



## Nordicus (May 3, 2013)

Jacobite said:


> ...then the likes of the Minotaurs wouldn't need to lay the smack down every once in a while.


And would be obsolete, which means we wouldn't see your pretty models


----------



## Jacobite (Jan 26, 2007)

Stormxlr said:


> Ye exactly, look at the Dark Angels. Proper hierarchy,all successor chapter answer directly to the Supreme Grandmaster Azrael no one steps out of the line unless he permits it.


My point exactly. Same with the BA's. And if Dante can keep Seth and the Flesh Tearers from going nuts and chasing after blood worse than Edward Cullen when that Bella wench is on the rag then Marnus Calgar should be able to do the same to his own extended family.



Nordicus said:


> And would be obsolete, which means we wouldn't see your pretty models


They would still be around, plenty of heretics out without the likes of the UM's errant kids picking fights with each other.


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

Some named characters have special places reserved for them in the bowels of hell.

Baharroth is still paying for being insane in third ed - he's not been good since. That was when he had about 7 attacks on the charge and for every hit he could roll another.
Baharroth charges - I've got 34 hits on your terminators with a power sword... He also had a 2+ re-rollable so nothing short or 3 lascannons could stop him. Basic arms fire wouldn' touch him.

Using the Black legion dex, it's now possible to take a nastier character than any bar abaddon in the codex.
Lord, MoS, BL demon weapon (puts him at I7) and then eternal warrior (cos the BL dex lets you take more than one artefact, like the eldar codex) and a powerfist for lols (and cos thats what he's armed with).
My NL lord is trying to make a name for himself at the moment. So far, he's killed 6 gargoyles. But I'm enjoying him more than the named characters.
I also hate 'ol' one punch' Mephiston - I've found him that much of a pain over the years, I've resorted to just taking Abaddon or one of the cc phoenix lords, cos that tones him down. If he charges, he dies. If I don't take one, he kills all my characters that don't have eternal warrior in one hit before they ever get to swing. Especially when my csm's are determined to throw themselves into harms way with challenges.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Stormxlr said:


> technically, if you put it this way, almost all special characters are just beefed up normal commanders with special rules.
> Sure there are some exceptions such as Avatar and Daemon Prince.
> But arent all Space Marines are the same? Some are just more excellent and become commanders/captains and if they continue they become leaders of the chapter.
> Yes I agree Belial is a bit bland, lacks in fluff, doesnt have much taste to him and bit more expensive than he should be.


No. Coteaz gives re-rolls to Seize, a tank for the front of the unit, charge defense through Sanctuary, a Mastery 2 Divination psyker if you prefer, and a decent shooting attack. None of his abilities can be gained through a normal Inquisitor. Then his main ability, Lord of Formosa, makes Henchmen Troops. This is an extension of a normal Inquisitor, who still lets you take Henchmen, but not as well as Coteaz. Mephiston plays like no other character in the Codex. Draigo makes Paladins Troops, and his statline is far beefier than a regular Grand Master while bringing the only Storm Shield the Grey Knights own and a special sword that helps him punch Psykers and Daemons even harder. Fateweaver brings something unique that essentially opens up a whole new build. Belial gives you Deathwing as Troops (and he's not even the only character who can do that), and... well, that's about it. He has nothing special about him to seperate him from a normal dude.



Stormxlr said:


> Lets dissect him.
> Belial comes with TDA, AP3 fleshbane sword and can be switched to TH/SS or 2 Lightning Claws for free, also a free Teleport Homer.
> 7 Special rules out of them 3 rules are unique to him;
> 
> ...


Teleport Homer may as well not even be there for all the times it's used. If it could be used on arrival, then maybe, but as it is, no way. Tactical Precision is nice. Deathwing as Troops is cool, but Azrael does it as well, usually better (in mono-Dark Angels, Belial. Most allies will want Azrael). Marked for Retribution, again - usually doesn't bring a gun, and if he does it's a pretty irrelevant one. Precision Shots are something all characters do, even at the squad level, Belial just does it a bit better.



Stormxlr said:


> Now a DA Company Master in Terminator Armor with SB/PS costs 130 points. Cant have Lightning Claws, or TH/SS, but can take Special Issue Wargear and Chapter Relics which compensates for that. Has an identical stat line. With Relic of Unforgiven and Mace of Redemption he costs 175 points and the mace is much better than the Sword of Silence Belial comes with.


Agreed. Honestly, I forgot the weird restriction on the Master not being able to bring Hammer/Shield, but I think you can bring Mace/Displacer for still less than Belial and be strictly better in combat. However, Belial's cost is mostly in his FOC swap, because as a dude he's pretty bad, as is the Company Master (linear warriors, quadratic wizards - buffs are better than punches. If the Company Master still had Rites of Battle, I'd be all over it, but as it stands? Nah)



Stormxlr said:


> Now that leaves me questioning how would you actually make him unique and useful?


Give him some Special Rules that are actually special, and cut his cost a bit.



Stormxlr said:


> In DA book the most unique HQ would be Azrael due to assortment of Special rules and Wargear, however he is expensive and I never actually found him useful.


I think Azrael's pretty good - not massively expensive, unique bonuses from the Lion Helm and Rites of Battle, FOC swaps, and some fancy wargear (not really new, but kind of fun). He's reasonable if you're pushing a 40-man Guard squad into midfield, but in a mono-Dark Angel list you'll usually end up wasting the Helm (which you really need to be using).

Sammael and Ezekiel are nice as well - Sammael's particularly nice, being pretty unique as a character. AP2 Power Sword, Jetbike, Eternal Warrior, good shooting capability (rare for any character, let alone a Space Marine character), and some really good buffs to the squad he joins (Scout and Skilled Rider are awesome). Ezekiel's Book of Salvation gives him a pass too, but Asmodai and Belial are pretty lame.



DkMiBuch said:


> So what are you saying? That you shouldn't view Belial as a person, but as a normal commander with termi armour?
> I don't care what his special combat skills are, I just fail to see the reasoning behind having this guy being the only way of playing Death Wing.


Yes, and because it makes sense that the leader of the Deathwing is a leader in Terminator Armour.



DkMiBuch said:


> I don't hate special characters, not at all. I just hate the fact, that they are the only way of using henchmen, purifiers and so on, as troops.


If they weren't, they wouldn't really be special at all, would they?



DkMiBuch said:


> They are unique characters, meaning that only one exists in the universe. However when playing a tournament, you are likely to have a Huron vs Huron showdown, because people depend on him to infiltrate their troops.


I see your point, but again - Huron's not the only Chaos Lord in the galaxy, and I'm sure there are others who are Lorgar-like latent psykers (hence the statline and Hamadrya), or bionically rebuilt in the same way (Iron Hands successor traitors, Iron Warrior splinter faction). Huron's rules fit Huron, but they're not exclusive.



DkMiBuch said:


> Am I understanding this correctly, that you are defending the notion of using "counts as" characters? I totally agree that the rules shouldn't work for just one Inquisitor in the entire galaxy, but sadly those are the rules.


Yeah - Games Workshop has done the same in every Codex since 3rd edition.



DkMiBuch said:


> So I guess that in principle, I'd wish more people would just model their own Chapter Master in terminator armour, and having him use the rules of Belial, just to rid us of the ridiculousness that is opposing armies fielding the same guy, of which only one exists.


Well being as there isn't a model for Belial with Hammer/Shield, 100% of them are converted or kitbashed. Other times, yeah, not good for the immersion when both players use the same model, but you get that all the time when you get two people using the same army and fighting each other. I had a 3-game event where I fought two other Dark Angels players, which doesn't make any sense in the fluff at all. Game =/= Fluff.


----------



## DkMiBuch (Feb 1, 2013)

MidnightSun said:


> I see your point, but again - Huron's not the only Chaos Lord in the galaxy, and I'm sure there are others who are Lorgar-like latent psykers (hence the statline and Hamadrya), or bionically rebuilt in the same way (Iron Hands successor traitors, Iron Warrior splinter faction). Huron's rules fit Huron, but they're not exclusive.





MidnightSun said:


> Well being as there isn't a model for Belial with Hammer/Shield, 100% of them are converted or kitbashed. Other times, yeah, not good for the immersion when both players use the same model, but you get that all the time when you get two people using the same army and fighting each other. I had a 3-game event where I fought two other Dark Angels players, which doesn't make any sense in the fluff at all. Game =/= Fluff.


It would seem that I agree with you then. Must have misinterpreted your original post! I like to keep things as "realistic" as possible during games, which is the only reason I sometimes have a problem with special characters. Using "counts as" definitely helps this.

And yes, I realize that talking about realism in a battle of 40k, seems rather odd. You all know what I mean


----------



## Mokuren (Mar 29, 2011)

6e special characters aren't the absolute bonkers they used to be a long time ago, when they required your opponent's permission. However, I don't personally use them. Ever.

It's just a fluff constraint of mine, they're named, specific, special characters, they're not mine, they're not part of my army and they don't really have a reason to be there. Why would Saint Celestine hang around my order? What's Uriah Jacobus doing in my turf? They have no place there, it's a completely different order roaming the galaxy hunting heretics and traitors.

What I hate is when special characters are either so damn good or so many they make all other options irrelevant. Saint Celestine got nerfed to hell and back, but she's still miles above any canoness I can ever build, and so is Uriah Jacobus. As a matter of fact, the canoness sucks goat balls and there's nothing I can do about it as it's my only HQ choice in the entire codex.

But I don't give a damn if you hand me the Chaos Marines codex: I have so many options and toys with generic HQs that I don't even need to look at special characters and feel like I'm missing some cheese I will never have and that will cost me every game.

Aside from this, I don't particularly care.

Except for Eldrad. He's a dick.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

Mokuren said:


> Except for Eldrad. He's a dick.


Just as planned.


----------



## Deathypoo (Jun 27, 2011)

As someone who can only actually play extremely rarely, it's hard enough for me to remember what everyone's troops are capable of... Special characters generally kill me out of my own ignorance of who they are and what they do. That's not the opponent's fault, obviously... but I'm also another holdover from days of "opponent's permission required" and I generally don't like them.

When it comes to fielding them myself, they always look underpowered for the points cost, compared to what 15~20 years of them being optional has taught me.


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

I'm from the 2nd/3rd era as well - you had to ask for permission. Which meant they were out of bounds for most games other than friendly (This is back in the day when Ahriman had a spell that was basically a Lascannon shot, and he never failed psychic tests, and had a chance to cast it twice). 

I'm used to not using characters other than for fluff reasons, as well. I run Asurman in my entirely Dire Avenger or Vehicle Eldar army, for example.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

I've never had a bad experience with a Special Character - Mephiston's fucked my opponents up pretty well a couple of times, but I don't know the last time I fought a really nasty Special Character. The Swarmlord, probably, but it's definitely a close-run thing as to whether he's better than a Flyrant. I enjoy fighting them as they usually bring an interesting army with them, but the ones who don't do anything unique are pretty much worse versions of generic characters.


----------



## neilbatte (Jan 2, 2008)

I actually like the way special characters are now I started in 2nd when they could easily smash through anything thrown at them and often faced them across the battlefield although I didn't use them myself.
The only characters I dislike facing are the ones that almost assure stealing the initiative like asdrubel vect the dark eldar as there is no counter to this and the ability to set up after your opponent with a 50% chance of having all your weapons in the right place to kill the stuff it's designed to kill just seems cheap.
It's only really since 5th that I've started using special characters and it brings some really cinematic games I recently played a game with my son where the only model left was my Ironhand straken. And I can't remember the last list I wrote that didn't include Pask in a punisher for anti air or horde removal.


----------



## HokieHWT (Dec 8, 2013)

I was really excited to have a themed army based on Catachan characters. Straken was in charge, Nork watched his back, Harker cleans house and takes objectives and Marbo blows shit up. So far they have done nothing other than Straken killing a couple of dreadnaughts. Straken doesn't do a thing but give orders, Nork is way to expensive, Harker becomes a bullet magnet (usually getting my opponent first blood, even when I give them forward sentries), and Marbo loves to either blow himself up or throw it off the board. Maybe I don't play them right, maybe I suck at rolling, maybe both but I'm now moving away from SC and praying that the new codex will give Straken the abilitiy to make ALL of his units Catachan Devils like he could in the Catachan Codex.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

neilbatte said:


> The only characters I dislike facing are the ones that almost assure stealing the initiative like asdrubel vect the dark eldar as there is no counter to this and the ability to set up after your opponent with a 50% chance of having all your weapons in the right place to kill the stuff it's designed to kill just seems cheap.


Top tip: go second. What use is being able to Seize on a 4+ if you're going first?

The Seize characters are nice, but the impact of Seize the Intiative itself is nullified somewhat by their presence - if I know I have a 50% chance of losing the first turn, I'll deploy as I would going second - out of LOS, out of range, with blockers etc.

You'll notice that the only armies that can Seize on a 4+ (Necrons and dark Elder) are shorter-ranged than most armies, and the others (Sicarius/Mantis Warriors Chapter Tactics for Space Marines, Coteaz for Grey Knights) are also mid-range armies, albeit with a heavier long-ranged presence than Dark Eldar or Necrons. Getting the first turn isn't all that great for these armies - they can't actually do much damage first turn from being either out of range completely or struggling with Shrouded from Night Fighting. The only issue is Coteaz allied in to Guard as an Inquisitorial Detachment, but his Seize is very unreliable (6+ rerollable, or roughly 33%, is a pretty low chance - his main utility comes from making the enemy re'roll THEIR Seize; maybe you could use this?).


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

:goodpost:

This +1.

Let them go first. Laugh if you seize the initiative back


----------



## Archon Dan (Feb 6, 2012)

Gret79 said:


> :goodpost:
> 
> This +1.
> 
> Let them go first. Laugh if you seize the initiative back


There are many times if I set up second that I don't want to seize. Let your opponent move into your range but get fewer shots off. 


As for the named characters, I like most of them. But at my LGS, we call the weekly gaming night, Patrol Night, so you usually need permission to field them. The games are usually under 1000 points per side and Dante, Imotekh or Eldrad aren't likely to go on patrol. The games are just quick skirmishes and a 200+ point character takes a big chunk out of an army. But when we organize larger games, everything is open. I'll still ask permission for Forge World and use other restrictions on myself in medium games, such as no Flyers if 1500 or less a side. Of course, I am one of the few with Flyers.


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

Archon Dan said:


> There are many times if I set up second that I don't want to seize. Let your opponent move into your range but get fewer shots off.


 
Yeah, thats a better, more sensible course of action. I tend to roll anyway as it's still funny if you seize...
I also get funny looks as I tend to use a cow from the fantasy giant kit as one of my objectives - slaanesh FTW. Especially with mysterious objectives - the cow of skyfire! :laugh:
I try to play for fun first and foremost


----------

