Look, in a vacuum the Slann is fine (more or less...). However, next to Kroak it is not. They are simply too similar, and fight for basicly the same niche, with one of the two options being clearly superiour in basicly all but one aspect. That is bad design. And simply tweaking their point costs will do nothing to fix that. And yeah, if all you care about is competitive list building then sure, it currently works to some extend. The spreadsheets are nice and balanced and there is a reason to pick the Slann in certain situations. But imho there's more to good design than just making sure the spreadsheets are balanced...
ok. then how would you fix it? since the problem is nether points or balance then how would you rectify the problem that 2 units (that are essentially the same thing kroak IS a slann just older and more powerful) are to similar?
In your opinion. I'm not interested in discussing overarching design philosophy, we've drained that conversation numerous times. The Kroak/Slann relationship feels very similar to most named character/base character relationships and that makes sense to me, sounds like it doesn't make sense to you and thats fine. The argument was around if the slann warscroll is a good warscroll. By your own admission, the slann's warscroll is worth its points. That makes it a good warscroll. Kroak being arguably undercosted doesnt really effect that.
Either give the slann a unique spell that fullfills a very different niche from Kroak. For example turn the Slann into a defensive or utility caster while Kroak is the offensive option. Or if you insist on making the Slann offensive as well, give him a single-target nuke to contrast Kroak's celestial deliverance, though that might require an absurdly powerfull singletarget nuke since Kroak can just hit one target 3 times with celestial deliverance. Alternativly, this could also be a different ability, but a unqiue spell probably makes the most sense fluff-wise. Or make Kroak into something similar to Teclis & Nagash, at which point he'd be different enough from a regular Slann. Basicly just make Kroaknado + an entourage of saurus guard into 1 unit and it'd probably be fine.
For the record, my whole point is that this is not the case. Simply being worth it's points does not mean a warscroll is a good warscroll.
how would that make any sense fluf wise? kroak taught all the slann every thing they know. if they can do it then he should (and does) do it better he has always been slann+ and the only slann that varied in all of warhammer history are other named slann. and your second idea is to just make the Kroak guard combo his warscroll...ok. or to make him into a nagash tecles parallel 2 units you have decried as bad disine many many times
and my whole point was it's unfair to hold a warscroll to your idealistic design standards and judge it poorly because it doesn't fulfill that.
Take a look at Kairos and how he compares to a regular lord of change. The difference between those two is: - Kairos has 3 spells v.s. a LoC 2. - Kairos has a different unique spell that can summon a spawn but degrades & does more reliable damage v.s. a less reliable damage spell but with higher maximum output and it doesn't degrade as the LoC gets wounded.. - Kairos has Oracle of Eternity v.s. a LoC beacon of sorcery - Kairos knows all spells of friendly wizards nearby - Some stat and load-out differences, most notably a LoC can take a ranged attack. The rest is the same. Kairos is still clearly the superiour wizard, but a LoC has some minor advantages. And there are some abilities that impact how you use the two. The LoC has a command ability, Kairos does not. Kairos benefits from being near friendly wizards, the LoC does not. The LoC has ranged attacks, Kairos is fully melee (aside from magic). Kairos unique spell summons reinforcments but the LoC has higher damage potential and doesn't degrade. All in all this means that despite Kairos clearly being the superiour wizard, but the LoC has some abilities Kairos can't do. Imho, this is an example of a reasonably well executed named major character which is special without outright overshadowing the regular variant. There's plenty of minor named characters that are decent as well, but those are usually limited to just getting say a +1 to hit and a minor ability or unique spell, so the difference is minor enough that it doesn't really matter that they're just a better version of a basic captain-type unit. I just meant make it a big single model, the basic idea behind that is fine. Teclis and Nagash just push it too far by having certain special rules that make them massive outliers in their respective areas. Kroak on a balewind+guards is currently 470 points, and imho that combo isn't too problematic yet. Make it roughly equal to that, round the cost to 500 and tweak some values and you probably got something reasonable. It shouldn't be as far an outlier as Teclis is with his guaranteed casts or Nagash with his 9 casts with +3 to rolls.
The idea that all a slann needs to become a "good warscroll" is a different spell or command ability just feels totally arbitrary. Difference for the sake of difference seems like a terrible way to balance or judge warscrolls. I think I get the larger point, that the slann needs a unique "niche" or will forever be Kroak-lite, i just don't know if that's necessarily true or necessarily actually an issue.
right but the argument is a lore one and kiros is not the progenitor of all lords of change Kroak is the first of all slann and knows every thing they do. but last time we had this argument you said that kroak(and to a lesser extent our slann) had the same problem as nagash and tecles. and now you want to push that envelope
Its amazing how the points mentioning kroak is OP all quote a combination using multiple warscrolls balewind+guards and then try and compare him to a single warscroll. So my question Is Kroak by himself so he is taken in the same context as everything you compare him to overpowered?
As someone else mentioned quite succinctly, every warscroll gets better when you add the power of other warscrolls. 320 points spent on kroak is arguably some of the best 320 points you can spend in the game. Kroak with his full entourage costs 600 points. That 600 point wizard is better than teclis, morathi, or nagash and cheaper than all of them. I'm genuinely confused how this is still a controversial topic. Edit: and id argue that kroak is the undercoasted part of his little package because none of the other pieces are a problem without kroak. It's spammable area of effect mortal wounds. I dunno who thought that spell was a smart idea, its always been impossible to balance.
Imho, we kinda need dynamic costs, cuz Kroak on his own also isn't exactly problematic. It isn't till you get the whole package that you create something that's actually an issue. Which is especially weird when you consider that some parts of this combo you'l never see on their own anyway. Might as well give a specific point-cost for the entire combo and treat it as 1 unit if you're not really going to see the seperate parts anyway. But sadly that's deemed too complicated for AoS... Lore-wise he might know everthing, but gameplay wise we still need a reason to pick the regular Slann. Anyways the point is that kairos is an excellent example of how to make a named character who's the greatest among equals without just making him a flat-out better version. The issue I have with Nagash & Teclis (and to a lesser extend Kroak & the Slann) is that they are extreme outliers in their field. Not with the fact that they're gods. E.g. Teclis his guaranteed casting rolls & his anti-magic aura allow him to absolutly dominate any lesser wizards to the point he invalidates them. However, if you toned down his magic domination in exchange for some other, less dominating skills, he'd be fine. In theory there's nothing wrong with big godlike heroes. The issue arises when those godlike heroes get to be such outliers that they simply invalidate lesser opponents. Keep them within reasonable limits; which seems to be around the 400-500 point mark with no obviously outlying skill; and it should be fine. Just make sure to keep the risks in the back of your mind. Also, for the record, I'd vastly prefer to just give them a different unique spell/ability and distinguish them via that option. Adding yet another godlike unit is risky and I'd prefer to avoid that. Just saying this is a possibility.
but the argument is about lore. you are the one who brought up fluf. quote "but a unqiue spell probably makes the most sense fluff-wise." unquote ultimately you are right the best way would be to give them a different spell but that's not your original point and you can't shift the gole posts now. soooo your just affirming my point. your solution as you stated above Quote "Or make Kroak into something similar to Teclis & Nagash, at which point he'd be different enough from a regular Slann. Basicly just make Kroaknado + an entourage of saurus guard into 1 unit and it'd probably be fine." unquote. is to do something you yourself say is bad. im not confident in your ideas on how to fix something when your opinions change to fit your argument. because with out his back up kroak isn't very good. a 12" burst spell made to target heroes is not a good spell the range is just far to short to be useful (see Vitriolic Spray: from Cities it's a even better spell ruined by bad range or the aspect of the sea from IDK same problem). so we count them as one unit just like we count hearth guard and priest or our old summoning as one price point because that's the only way people take them. and yes he is better then some of the other gods not tecless but morathy certainly and nagash sort of but i have always said that those 2 models aren't all that good. it is disingenuous to claim that kroak is only 320 because his 320 load out is not the problem the 600 point combo is the problem. on top of that points are more valuable in our army due to such a over reliance on synergies so having a power pair be almost 1/3rd of our army hurts us much more then many other armies hence why i don't touch kroak.
The intention of what I said there was that giving a Slann a unique spell to distinguish him from Kroak makes more sense than say making him a long ranged artillery piece by giving him a good ranged attacks. Not that it is the only solution. More in general the points I've been trying to make are as followed: - Slann & Kroak are too similar, with Kroak simply being the superiour option resulting in the slann being doomed to live in Kroak's shadow. - Tweaking point-costs will do nothing to actually fix that problem. - To fix this I'd like to see the Slann get unique utility when compared to Kroak (e.g. defensive spells v.s. Kroak's offensive spells), for which a unique spell makes the most sense fluff-wise but I am open to other options such as a different command ability, or distinguishing him stat-wise or even in terms of combat effectiveness. - If this is not an option I'd suggest turning Kroak into one of the godlike heroes, though this would be my absolute last resort as I'm generally not a fan of godlike heroes. They can work in theory but so far GW has consistently made the godlike heroes be problematic in one way or another. The sole reason Í'm even considering this is because currently Kroaknado is already very common, might as well make it officially one unit and use this to properly distinguish Kroak from the regular Slann in the process. Is it clearer this way what I've been trying to say?
yes i get what your trying to say i have since the beginning. i just think it's really really dumb. because you think there is some nebulus "to similar" problem(despite their not being one as seen in man turny results and several list builds), and because you think that neither points or balance applies to this. quote" And simply tweaking their point costs will do nothing to fix that. And yeah, if all you care about is competitive list building then sure, it currently works to some extend. The spreadsheets are nice and balanced and there is a reason to pick the Slann in certain situations. But imho there's more to good design than just making sure the spreadsheets are balanced..." unquote your solution is to ether add a unit to kroaks war scroll quote" Basicly just make Kroaknado + an entourage of saurus guard into 1 unit" unquote wich just exacerbates the problem of tha slann being "to similar" but worse. as that would just add another ability to kroaks warscroll and leave the slann unchanged. or give the slann a secondary spell turning him into a defence/utility castor quote " For example turn the Slann into a defensive or utility caster while Kroak is the offensive option." unquote wich he already is a utility castor so changes nothing and if you go defence just shifts the "to similar" problem to the slann and the star seer as he is our defencive caster. OR replace the "to similar" problem with a different problem that you think is just as bad. all of that to meet your nebulous idea of good game design. a concept that is still completely unknown to me despite having many many many conversations on this topic and spectating over even more (sorry putz quoting you now) quote"In your opinion. I'm not interested in discussing overarching design philosophy, we've drained that conversation numerous times." unquote. and to my best guess boils down to what you personally like or dislike dealing with. all to avoid the standard ways of fixing balance issues.
being "to simular" isn't even a problem in the first place. it is common practice to have a better more expensive version of a unit in strategy games. feral carnasuars are weaker but cheaper then mounted heroes in TTW2, standard zomby dragons/ terrorists are cheaper then their mounted versions in AoS(and people still use both) IG troopers and psyons, great wyrm and crawling wyrm, varka dragon and brood mother dragon, maelstrom and twin twister. this happens all the time and it's fine. just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's bad
Eh, i don't disagree that the base 10'' spell isn't that problematic. I do slightly disagree that his "320 point loadout" isn't problematic. If I believe a Slann is reasonable costed (which i do) then 60 points for a 4+++, an extra cast, an extra spell, and an extra command point generation is excessive. If balewind didn't exist I think Kroak would be more than fine in the 360 range, but his base kit is still a little bloated for what you spend. Well, dynamic costs would make the game way too complicated and barely provide a more elegant solution to a tiny handful of problems. Kroak's basekit is bloated and his celestial deliverance spell has always been a problem in combination with range increasing options. Kroak is the problem, he's always been the problem. There's a reason why anytime he's efficiently costed and has access to range increasing options he's overpowered. This is the third separate time in AOS the "Kroaknado" has been overly strong. The problem is, and always has been, his aoe mortal wound spam in combination with range increasing options. He simply needs to be pointed in a way that considers that possibility because it always happens. Let's make this clear. Yes, "kroaks whole package" is an issue but its the KROAK in that package that creates the issue. With or without his entourage, Kroak's kit is bloated and overly efficient. If the b alewind didn't exist, his base cost wouldn't need to be raised as high as it would otherwise need to, but 320 points is still too cheap for kroak, regardless of what else you bolt on top of him.
Again, the issue isn't that the Slann is bad. It's decent. And as long as it's decent you will see it used. The issue is that it's literally the same warscroll, which simply isn't good design as people will just tend to gravitate to whomever is the more efficient pick with the other falling out of favour. And yeah, point values don't do anything to change that it's still the same warscroll, with acces to the same spell-lore and same endless spells. Yeah you can give the Slann a better artifact and he'l gain some popularity, or you can increase Kroak's cost to make him less popular. But all that means is that you're changing which of the two is more efficient, you're not distinguishing them from one another beyond efficiency. If you're lucky both choices might stay close enough in power that it's difficult to determine which one is the most efficient, and you'l see a reasonable split in useage as people just use their personal favorite. But more likely than not you'l see one of the two becoming a meta pick... And imho, when the only difference between two choices in a competitive game is that one is more efficient, but both provide the exact same utility & powers, it's not a real choice and the design of these choices has failed as one of the two might could be removed from the game without the game being significantly worse off. No it doesn't the Starseer provides 2 unique advantages compared to the slann: 1) the astromancer's staff and 2) his unique spell. Provided you don't give the Slann a spell that's literally the same as the starseer's spell there's enough of a difference to still pick the starseer (in theory at least). On a sidenote, the starseer has other problems, but that is not because it's not unique. It has a unique tools that are worthwhile on their own. People just prefer the toolset a Slann or Starpriest can bring over what a starseer brings.
I still think this fundamentally ignores that something being cheaper has a huge impact on list design. And let's be clear, they don't provide the same utility and powers. They provide the same utility, while Kroak provides aoe mortal wounds. Between that and the flexibility the cheaper slann provides, they are plenty different and it seems like this argument is being made more based on the idea of what they are capable of, than their actual impact on the table. Assuming the advantages of taking kroak wer emore reasonable costed (lets say he's 380 instead of 320), the decision simply isn't about "which is more efficient" because there is a literal design choice to be made in your list construction. Do you want to spend the 100 points for the mortal wound option? Do you then add saurus guard and an astrolith to double down on that mortal wound option? Or do you take the cheaper slann for the built in utility (global unbinds, comets call, cp generation) because you play an allegiance that gets more from the 100+ points your saving? Or maybe you're simply playing a list that doesnt need that aoe mortal wound tool because you have access to character sniping and mortal wounds from other places. These are important questions that make list construction actually interesting when things are "balanced." You can't just blatantly ignore that something "just being cheaper" has a MASSIVE impact on list design... again, assuming that Kroak and Slann are both "worth their points."