Warhammer Dwarfs, discussion/hype thread

[Burnsaber]

The most up-to-date preview picture:



--Stats for the weakest unit, the Clansdwarf (aka a template of sorts).
Hp - 13 (Smaller than humans, but much tougher)
Prot - 3 (tough little sods)
str - 11 (dwarfs are clearly strong given their weapons/armour)
att - 11/12 (all skilled fighters)
def - 10 (skilled, but lower initiative)
ap - 8 (with the armour, this makes them a very slow army)
mr - 13 (dwarfs are famed for resisting magic)
mor - 14 (They have the best morale in Warhammer)
gcost - 15 (Clearly higher than regular troops and dwarves are quite few in number)
prec - 10/11 (dwarfs like ranged combat almost as much as melee)
mapmove - 2 (although slow in battle, they have great endurance and tunnel systems)
enc - 2 (dwarfs don't tire easily)
size - 2 (though short, dwarfs have quite high mass and do not swarm)

Other abilities

Darkvision 50%
Mountain Survival
Shockres 50%
Siegebonus 2 (All dwarfs have knowledge of siege warfare, also allows them to break fortresses with fever numbers)
Castledef 3 (dwarfs are experts in defensive tactics)


THE NATION SHOULD

Emphasise defence and patient warfare - good PD and forts
Not outnumber most enemies or win through numbers
Be powerful both at range and in melee
Have top notch forging but not battlemagic
Have superior equipment and a strong emphasis on resources
Be relatively capital centric
Not take losses lightly
Be totally drain immune


UNITS

Clansdwarf (medium armour, shield, dwarf axe)
Heavy Clansdwarf (heavy armour, shield, dwarf axe)
Clansdwarf Crossbow (light armour, dwarf crossbow, dwarf axe)
Heavy Clansdwarf Crossbow (medium armour, dwarf arbalest, dwarf axe)
Longbeard (heavy armour, shield, dwarf axe - superb morale, standard effect, good stats, but are borderline old age.)
Ironbreaker (very heavy armour, shield, dwarf warhammer - resists various nasty things)
Ranger (medium armour, Dwarf Greataxe, 2x Dwarf throwing axe - stealth, forest survival)
Miner (heavy armour, dwarf pickaxe - stealth, siegebonus, mapmove 3)
Slayer (no armour, slayer axe + slayer axe - morale 30, berserk, high str, weapons that deal extra damage to larger foes)
Hammerer (heavy armour, two-handed hammer) - Elite, nearly unbreakable with insane morale, but only mapmove 1 (they are home guards)
Rune Guard (very heavy armour, shield, runeaxe - elite, sacred, mapmove 1, cap only)


LEADERS

Ranger Champion - scout with 40 leadership to lead stealthy rangers.
Prospector - Stealthy, map move 3, calls some miners to the edges of the battlefield in each combat.
Thane (great leader)
Giant Slayer (poor leader, good thug)
King (sacred, superb leader, starts with magic gear, thuggish, standard, cap only)
Journeyman Runesmith (Sacred, E2H1, forge 10, drain immune)
Runesmith (sacred, E2H2, 100% E/F/S random, 10% A/E/F/W random, forge 20, high casting encumberance, mapmove 1, drain immune)
Rune Lord (sacred, cap only, expensive, E3F1H2, 100% E/F/S random, 10% A/E/F/W random, forge 30, drain immune, mapmove 1)
Engineer (E1A1F1, Massive siegebonus and castledef, uses "dwarven arbalest", making him a quite of an sniper, very expensive in resources, not drain immune like rune smiths)

Summons:

Daemon Slayer Thaumathurgy level 5 S2H3- Thug incarnate, perhaps even SC with the right gear
Anvil of Doom Enchantment level 7 E6H3- Summons a Runelord, using a great runic artefact. He's a magic caster that does not get penalties in combat, very high and diverse magic (F2E2A2W2S3H4), expensive as hell to summon. Immobile (but able to Teleport/ Cloud Trapeze).
Last Anvil of the Dwarrows Enchantment level 9 E7H3 - Summons Thorek Ironbrow and along with the most ancient anvil of doom. Unique summon, very expensive, but has F3E3A3W3S4D2H4. Immobile (but able to Teleport/ Cloud Trapeze).
Distill Thunder Alteration level 4, 1A1E - Summons a dwarf armed with "Thunder Staff", works much like thunder throwing of Storm Daemons.
Distill Flame Alteration level 4, 1F1A - A dwarf armed with a runic "Dragon Staff", low range, but accurate and powerful. The staff can also be used in melee as a flaming weapon.

Spells:

Rune of Grimnir* Thaumathurgy level 3 - E1H2 - Berserks and hastes and str boosts some allied troops around the caster, including him, modded to be only casted on command
Rune of Valaya** Enchantment level 3 E1H2 - Heals troops and boosts morale
Rune of Grungni*** Construction level 3 E1H2 - Basically Legions of Steel that is easer to cast. Rarely gives armour piercing weapons (as an mr negates easily effect)
Grudgestone Evocation level 3 E1H1- Throws a big boulder on enemies. Survivors will be cursed.
Rune of Fire Enchantment level 7 F2H4- nasty combat evocation, intended for the anvils
Rune of Earth Enchantment level 7 E2H4 - Causes curse of stones and earth meld ,intended for the anvils
Rune of Water Enchantment level 7 W2H4 - Rusts armor and slimes, intended for the anvils
Rune of Thunder Enchantment level 7 A2H4 -nasty combat evocation, intended for the anvils
Rune of Doom Enchantment level 9 D2H4 - Casts Darkness, curses all opponens and calls worth ghosts of Dwarrow Ancestors to fight in the battle.

*Dwarven god of war and grudges
**Dwarven female god of home and family
***Dwarven god of craftmanship

Pretenders:
-Mother of All ("Valaya") 50pt base, medicore combat stats, dom 4, S1E1 base, healing 100%, nobadevents 25, castledef 25, pathcost 30.
-Father of Runes ("Grungi") 50pt base, dom 3, ok combat stats, pre-equipped with heavy gear, E2 base, forgebonus 50, pathcost 50.
-Grudgebearer ("Grimnir") 50pt base, good combat stats, dom 2, fear 0, grudgelore, slayer axes, no armor slot, E1F1 base magic, pathcost 80.
-Master Alchemist As in vanilla
-Monolith As in vanilla

Heroes:
-Dwarf High King Thorgrim (general badass and holds the Book of Grudges, filling the dwarfs in his army with vengeance and fighting spirit. He will also be able to curse foes)
-Dwarf Runelord Krag the Grim (Runelord hero with E4S2F2H3, but old age)
-Dwarf Slayer King of Karak Kadrin, Ungrim Ironfist (This guy will eat giants for breakfast)
-Dwarf Engineer Guildmaster, Burlock Damminson (Engineer hero with a mechanic hand)
-Dragon Slayer, multihero

[Calchet]

I admire your effort, and with luck, this'll spur me into finally finishing up my Chaos Dwarfs to give them something to bear a grudge against...

A few comments:


1. Dwarfs. Not dwarves, or you're likely to eat the wrong end of an axe.

2. Looking at the preliminary graphic, remember that warhammer dwarfs are *very* stout. I'd suggest more width, and perhaps a more splendid beard. (Even regular warriors have some pride!)

3. Dwarf Rangers are marked more by their large weapons than crossbows, from the codex I have access to, and are probably more likely to use throwing axes as secondary armament - having them do so will add some variety to your projectile lineup.

4. "Crossbow" should obviously be "Quarreler".

5. Slayers are skilled with all kinds of axes - not swords. I'd suggest two axes, or possibly a greatweapon.

6. Thunderers are awesome, but I can see why you'd avoid them - that said, it feels a bit odd to have steam-powered gyrocopters and such, and not guns.

7. A 'Grudgestone' evocation that tosses a boulder might be a good replacement for the grudge thrower war machines...

8. Slayers don't really lead troops except for other slayers, so I'd push the Dragon Slayer down to poor leadership.

[Burnsaber]

Originally Posted by Calchet

I admire your effort, and with luck, this'll spur me into finally finishing up my Chaos Dwarfs to give them something to bear a grudge against...

Can't wait to see them. As for the Grudge Bearing, I don't think that it's that necessary. Dwarfs have a long list grudges basically against anything that is able to move. I'm pretty sure that there are a few lines about Squirrels stealing picnic foodstuffs in the Book of Grudges.

*shakes fist*
Our meals will be avenged!

Originally Posted by Calchet

1. Dwarfs. Not dwarves, or you're likely to eat the wrong end of an axe.

Right, this was one of the few cases where being gramatically correct spells "D-O-O-M", my bad.

Originally Posted by Calchet

2. Looking at the preliminary graphic, remember that warhammer dwarfs are *very* stout. I'd suggest more width, and perhaps a more splendid beard. (Even regular warriors have some pride!)

Remember that most units will be shielded, it adds bulkiness. And because the dwarf graphics are somewhat smaller and have similiar color schemes, I need to save up my tricks on how I can make them look different from one another. The Higher tier units (longbeards, slayers, breakers, hammers, rune guards) will be beefier. As for the beard, it's a bit trickier than it looks - I'm still experimenting with it.

Originally Posted by Calchet

3. Dwarf Rangers are marked more by their large weapons than crossbows, from the codex I have access to, and are probably more likely to use throwing axes as secondary armament - having them do so will add some variety to your projectile lineup.

I know of the throwing axe, I'm keeping it as "ace in the sleeve", so to speak. If the playtesting shows that two troops are a bit too similiar, I can give the other throwing axes to compensate, since basically almost any unit expect Hammers and breakers could thematically have it.

Originally Posted by Calchet

4. "Crossbow" should obviously be "Quarreler".

Seriously? I don't recall such of an term in the army book. It sounds really lame. Remember that there is nothing comical about dwarves.

Originally Posted by Calchet

5. Slayers are skilled with all kinds of axes - not swords. I'd suggest two axes, or possibly a greatweapon.

True. Fixed

Originally Posted by Calchet

6. Thunderers are awesome, but I can see why you'd avoid them - that said, it feels a bit odd to have steam-powered gyrocopters and such, and not guns.

The gyrocopters and the like are there to give diversity to the unit-lineup (explained by rune magic), whereas Thunderers are just hard hitting ranged units (like crossbows). I'm still on the fence if I'll add a "dwarf arbalest" unit to 'compensate'. or should that be "arbalesterer"? :P

Originally Posted by Calchet

7. A 'Grudgestone' evocation that tosses a boulder might be a good replacement for the grudge thrower war machines...

True. Dwarfs should be pretty good at stoning their enemies.

...

What?

Originally Posted by Calchet

8. Slayers don't really lead troops except for other slayers, so I'd push the Dragon Slayer down to poor leadership.

Just 10 is seriously sucky thought. I'll first see how badass the Slayers become, if they are a considerable force with just 10 guys, then I might lower it.

[kianduatha]

Woo! Dwarfs!

But the way it's sounding...they're Ulm. But with 2 mapmove and 4 more magic resist. Oh, and stealthy troops. And a better endgame, it sounds.

Baseline these guys sound like they should be maybe 16 or so gold. They have the increased stats and extra abilities of Ice Guards. So their cheapest troops should be the same price. It's not like anyone expects dwarfs to be cheap.

I would love a boulder throw spell.

[Calchet]

As far as the "Quarreler" thing goes, the 7th edition book calls them that, and I'd say it fits the dwarfen spirit rather well.

"Crossbow? Baah, just because some uppity humans finally figured out how to make 'em doesn't mean a thing. They've been quarrelers since the beginning, and we're not going to change it."

(Also, in that same book, Dwarfs are very rarely referred to as 'man', which makes sense to me - for example, I'd reckon Clansdwarf is more in line with their naming sense than Clansman, but these things are clearly up to you. Finally, "Dwarfs", while perhaps a bit more rare, is no less grammatically correct than "Dwarves", unless my English knowledge fails me.)

And with that, back with me to churning out eleventy-five more varieties of greenskin slaves.

[Burnsaber]

Originally Posted by kianduatha

Woo! Dwarfs!

But the way it's sounding...they're Ulm. But with 2 mapmove and 4 more magic resist. Oh, and stealthy troops. And a better endgame, it sounds.

Baseline these guys sound like they should be maybe 16 or so gold. They have the increased stats and extra abilities of Ice Guards. So their cheapest troops should be the same price. It's not like anyone expects dwarfs to be cheap.

I would love a boulder throw spell.

The Ulm comparison is good, thanks for bringing that to my attention. I think that MA Ulm will make a fine measurement stick for balance. The dwarfs will be a lot more better than ulmish infantry, but it will be a lot more expensive too. Dwarfs will also have worse battle magic.

And yeah, the current gold cost for the clandwarf is probably too low, 15 or so sounds a bit more appropiate.

Originally Posted by Calchet

As far as the "Quarreler" thing goes, the 7th edition book calls them that, and I'd say it fits the dwarfen spirit rather well.

"Crossbow? Baah, just because some uppity humans finally figured out how to make 'em doesn't mean a thing. They've been quarrelers since the beginning, and we're not going to change it."

Oh, my experience comes from 6th edition. That explains the difference. Did they get rid of the "Battle Anvil"*, I mean the non-unique Anvil of Doom variant? I don't see the figure in the current GW miniature selection.

But about the name, it just strikes me as silly. Ever since Gimli's performance as the wacky comical sidekick in the LoTR movies, dwarfs have just kept on getting sillier and sillier. I've gotten kind of sick of them being descripted as stupid, stubborn, old alcoholic short men everywhere. This doesn't really fit into my idea of dwarves.

My dwarfs will be tragic, constantly griefing over the loss of their race. Reminiscing of the golden days and how all of that has fallen, feeling inadequate for failing to keep their ancestor's dream alive. They're a depressed, melancholic dying race and it will show. With the coming of the awakening god, the dwarfs have suddenly got a second chance at lost glory. They'll approach this matter with the dedication and focus it deserves. Being a dwarf is a very serious matter.

Originally Posted by Calchet

Also, in that same book, Dwarfs are very rarely referred to as 'man', which makes sense to me - for example, I'd reckon Clansdwarf is more in line with their naming sense than Clansman, but these things are clearly up to you.

Sounds good and thematic, thanks for pointing that out.

Originally Posted by Calchet

Finally, "Dwarfs", while perhaps a bit more rare, is no less grammatically correct than "Dwarves", unless my English knowledge fails me.

Really? I remember my english teacher red-penning "thiefs" from an essee of mine and telling me that words that end in f have a plural of "ves" (like elf, elves, thief, thieves). Well, not important in any case.

*sorry can't recall the correct name at the moment.

[Sombre]

I would actually increase the siege to 2 and castledef to 3 on dwarfs. Every dwarf, even a random young warrior, knows more about tunnels and structural engineering than just about anyone (barring specialists). I gave all skaven siegebonus 1 because they can all dig tunnels, but skaven tunnels are dangerous, poorly constructed things and they generally break sieges in the most volatile and crude ways (with poison wind, warpfire and collapsing huge quantities of earth, perferably on 'spent' slaves or rival clans).

Take for example karak eight peaks. There are no more than a couple thousand dwarfs in there and there are countless thousands of greenskins outside and skaven below, but they've held it and sieged/taken it back numerous times.

[Stavis_L]

Originally Posted by Burnsaber

Really? I remember my english teacher red-penning "thiefs" from an essee of mine and telling me that words that end in f have a plural of "ves" (like elf, elves, thief, thieves). Well, not important in any case.

*sorry can't recall the correct name at the moment.

essee --> essay.

For every grammatical rule in English, there are exceptions. Don't let your English professor tell you otherwise. In this case, a certain J.R.R. Tolkien (who was a linguist and etymologist) popularized the "dwarves" version, so it has some staying power, but I believe "dwarfs" was more common (although certainly not exclusive) previously. FWIW, Firefox's spellchecker prefers "dwarfs".

[Calchet]

Looking at the 7th book, there are multiple Anvils of Doom, belonging to different clans - so, while each throng can field one and only one, either attached to a normal Runelord or included with Thorek Ironbrow of Karak Azal, they are not actually unique as such.

There are even described three different varieties of Anvil of Doom, though they function no differently in mechanical terms:

- Anvil of Doom dedicated to Grimnir, emphasising fury
- Anvil of Doom dedicated to Grungni, emphasising effort
- Anvil of Doom dedicated to Valaya, emphasising loyalty

The possible effects from striking these Anvils, are:

- Rune of Wrath and Ruin - Damages and slows an enemy unit, and prevents it from flying, with an Ancient Power roll dealing additional damage. (Earthmeld + area-of-effect Damage? Perhaps even toss in a Storm?)

- Rune of Hearth and Hold - All friendy Dwarf units may reroll failed Fear or Terror tests until your next shooting phase, with an Ancient Power roll instead granting immunity. (Fanaticism + something?)

- Rune of Oath and Honor - Allows one friendly Dwarf unit (other than gyrocopters) to make a move in the shooting phase, with an Ancient Power roll instead letting 1d3 units do so. (Area-of -effect Quickness with lowish precision?)

[archaeolept]

eh, from wikipedia:

The plural form dwarfs has been traced to the 17th century. The alternative plural dwarves has been recorded in the early 18th century (cf. such plurals as "loaves," "elves", "halves," etc.) but was not generally accepted until used by philologist J. R. R. Tolkien in his fantasy novel The Hobbit. Neither spelling represents the regular phonetic development of the Old English plural dweorgas, namely dwarrows; rather, they descend from a new plural formed in Middle English from the singular stem. Similarly, the old inherited plural dwarrows acquired a singular dwarrow.[4] Although dwarrow has passed from the language, both dwarfs and dwarves are in current use. Many grammarians prefer dwarfs; many fantasists prefer dwarves.

both are good. "dwarfs" seems to be the official warhammer choice, though.