8th Ed. 8th Edition Lizardmen Rules Update

So, I have tried this before, and it might very well go like my other attempts, which is to say that it will not actually be used.
Still, one can dream right.

What I have done, is taken my last attempt at updating the rules for Lizardmen (GW isn't going to anyway). I went for not making too big changes, but still noticeable, and hopefully more lore friendly, such as giving Kroxigors Toughness 5 which @NIGHTBRINGER might like.

Here is a link to the Google docs: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QYT52vDe0u2lumhNMZRs-zJ8f0qWlXySVYBDNnRcEQc/edit?usp=sharing

Bear in mind that you can comment in the document if you feel the need for that, or for ease of pointing out something specific.

Tell me what you think.

 

Interesting stuff. Overall the army got considerable stronger (via the accumulation of small improvements across the board).

Some things that stood out:

• you reduced the Terradon Riders' BS to 0 but kept their fireleech bolas as an option
• I like the Temple Guard Guardians rule addition of being able to accept challenges, though I would limit the ability to challenges directed at a Slann only (as opposed to all characters)
• I don't think I would reduce the points cost on the Salamander (the reduced Initiative is offset by the improved leadership of the handlers) and the Salamander is currently already one of our best units
• how can the Razordon shoot its Barbs with a BS of 0?
• Bastiladon seems like an absolute tank, 2+ armour and toughness 8. My Tomb Kings sphinxes would be jealous
• Slann Mage Priest can be made into effectively a level 7 wizard in terms of casting and level 6 in terms of dispelling. +1 bonus to cast via High Magic. 1+ to cast and dispel for Focused Rumination. +1 to cast and dispel via Book of Ashur. Expensive, but possible.

 

The BS's of 0 was definitely not intentional, but nicely spotted .

The Terradon riders and razordon now both have BS 3.

This is probably better, since there is likely not many instances anyway where you would not take the challenge with a saurus character anyway, and it makes more sense for the units.

Gotcha.

I likely went a bit overboard there . I reduced it to a Toughness 7.
It was not very tanky before, which I found very odd. Sure it had a +2 AS, but it still had that generic Toughness 5 most monsters seem to have. It was very cheap I will give it that, but with this change it lives up to its fluff much better IMO.
It is still not exactly exceptional in combat though.

That is true, and I tried to balance it through cost. I do not however think it is too powerful, since High Elves get the +1 to high magic too, and High magic is supposed to be our signature lore as well. The Book of Ashur is then just something everyone can take and the discipline is really just a very watered down version of the discipline in 7th were we got a freed die every spell, which was too powerful of course, but it was cheaper than this discipline and would statistically give 3.5 times more, and make it possible to cast with 7 dice at a time.
So really we can just for a high cost get one up on the generic wizards of the High elves.
I would consider making it cost 70 points though, then it is the same price at 'Book of Ashur'.
I would also argue that the cost is quite expensive, though I guess the benefit from each +1 to cast and dispel is not completely linear. What I mean is that for every wizard I have seen, increasing their level costs 35 points, so both the Book of Ashur and this discipline are double that and you don't even get an additional spell like you would with an increase in level. I do think that each +1 to cast is more powerful than the last, but that should be balanced by the much steeper cost.

To balance the Slann I did also decrease their wounds to 4.

Too much stronger or is it balanced by the increased point cost for some of the units?

 

Overall I think it would make the army stronger even factoring in the points increase. I still think the army would be easily weaker than DE, HE or WoC though. However, the justification when facing a lower tier army (TK, Beastmen, Bretonnia, O&G) would be more difficult. That's one of the two biggest challenges facing custom rules: if you alter one book, you have to alter them all.

I do like the ideas you have employed though. It definitely makes the units feel more inline with the fluff.

 

Great!

Ideally I would update all other factions, but it would take a lot of time and there is very little guarantee that anyone would use it. I don't have the rules for most other factions either, but I know I would change the Giants from O&G they are awful, or maybe I'm just not a fan of the random attacks.

Still if there somehow was some genuine interest in using it I would gladly do it.

Also if I did that I would like to change other things, like varying the number of thunderstomps for each monster, making them more unique and giving an additional tool for balancing. Making monsters a bit stronger in general but making better counters that is not just cannons.
Change fly and armor piercing to not be fixed values and change the magic system somehow, as it scales rather poorly with game size.

 

To be completely honest, i play 8th very rarely, and when i do, it is mostly for nostalgia. Using new rules in this mindset seems somewhat contradictory. I however, do admire this idea and i will give it a closer look. I sometimes get a bit harsh when scrutinizing the work of other people, please do not take it personally. I do admire the time and effort you have put in this document.

I do not really agree giving Sauri WS 4. I always interpreted that they were the perfect warriors in the sense that they are fierce, which is shown in their higher than average S 4. I think that a disciplined unit should have the upper hand when at least hitting their way more savage, and less coordinated enemy. In the fluff Scar vets and Oldbloods are always portrayed as of having a really positive influence on the tactics used by other Sauri, maybe he can give them the buff to 4? +1 I seems fair, i always thought it is weird they are as slow as zombies.

I am starting to see some pr LM bias here, if you do not mind me saying. Buffing skink skirmishers by giving them +1 LD with no point increase seems pretty ridiculous to me. They are already one of the best, if not the best core units in the game, buffing them seems just pushing way too much. I would expect a nerf, no matter how much i like my Skinks they are too good. 9th age perhaps nerfed them too much, but 7 pts a pop is just nothing for skink skirmishers.

I like the added rule on the TG, points increase seems fair.

I once again think you were overly enthusastic with the COC. Not every pick has to be very competitive, i always found that they were already ok in the right list, even though i am in the miniority on that. Buffing them again seems overly enthusiastic.

I dont know about the Krox, i never really use them, and this seems like a big change, so unable to say anything on that.

+1 wound for a Stegadon with only 5ppm more seems insane to me. They are already pretty good monsters, no need to make them overpowered. One wound more is really impactful, especially because Steggies are stubborn, so you are really going to have to get through those wounds. I think you at least need a 20 point increase for this to be ok, notwithstanding the other buffs he got.

I never really use the Bastiladon, so hard to comment on this , except that these changes once again seem pretty big, but at least here they have a pretty big point increase.

Rippers are already pretty good, no need to buff them. Same pattern.

Same about the Ancient Steggie, these buffs just go overboard. We are already, contrary to popular believe, one of the best armies in 8th IMHO. No need to make us better than WOC.

Salamanders being buffed is also insane, same reasons as before.

I actually like the changes quite a bit on the Troglodon, he is like our one unit that is truly unplayable, which is a shame with his awesome model. Changes are too large to really comment on without playing with the guy, but this goes in the right direction i would say.

Like the changes to the Scarvet. I however, wonder why you made the Cold One cheaper, as that is the "OP" option in 8th.

I really think not having a max discipline limit is a bad idea for Slann. It creates Hero Hammer-esque scenarios. I do think that magic scales poorly in large games of 8th with the max 12 PD and all, so maybe you can have 100 pts max in normal armies, and no allowance Slann in Grand Armies? It just seems really boring to play against someone with an unkillable frog that is worth literally half their victory points.

I like the idea of a new Skink lore. I sortoff like the fluff that the HE actually learned to do their magic based off our magic, but the downside of it is that we did not have our own toys. This lore seems slightly underwhelming though. Like, getting poisoned attacks, getting regen, yawn. Also, the lore attribute is completely dead against anything that is not Skaven, and even against Skaven, it sounds pretty mediocre. I think lore attributes are a great way to add specific flavor to a lore, especially as it works on every spell. Sotek is very sacrifice centric, and damage focussed in my mind. Perhaps you could do something like: "for each wound you do you get a blood counter, that symbolizes the blood that has been spilled for Sotek. When casting a spell, before rolling the power dice, you can turn in 5 (10? Idk) blood counters to add an additional casting dice to the spell. This die contributes to misscasts, etc. You can only ad one dice per magic phase per wizard in this fashion". Just an idea?

TLDR, my opinion is that LM are already pretty good, and there is no need to make them even better. Try to think from the perspective of your opponent, would you be ok playing this new list with our current army list? Tbh, i think that when you buff any unit, except the Troglodon, when you buff it you have to also nerf it at the same time. I also think that some of your units just need a nerf, especially Skink skirmishers and Cowboys, and maybe even Salamanders. Nice project, keep it up, and perhaps i will use it when it is somewhat more balanced.

 

Beware! Wall ahead, proceed at your own risk

Good point. Part of the reason I'm doing it is just because I think it is fun to imagine new rules, but it would of course be awesome if someone actually wanted to use them.

No worries , I do not have a problem with harsh as long as it is civilized. Besides, if I didn't want any potential harsh critique, then I should not have shared it. Also harsh critique might be better sometimes, since it more strongly emphasizes if a particular thing is not right.

I do quite like that idea with the saurus characters improving the regular saurus. I guess that would also incentivise taking them with the saurus, instead of alone on a cold one.

I would be surprised if that did not happen honestly. I can get carried away sometimes.

They never were very effective when I used them, but you are probably right. I just did not increase their points, since they with the +1 LD were identical to their 7th edition iteration, with the same points cost.

Could very well be, I think it's hard to set them right, as stupidity can be a big downside, even though we have a good tool in dealing with it with Coldblooded. Maybe keep their price tag from 8th then, but give them the free spears to give them some sort of bonus on the charge, since they are cavalry?

It is, it's just that they are very squishy with Toughness 4, as they are then less survivable than saurus warriors who have the same Toughness and save, but also a parry save and for the same price also has more wounds and are faster in CC as they do not have great weapons. I get that Kroxigor have higher movement and cause fear, but it is mostly a change to make them more in line with how I see them fluff-wise.

I could agree with that. It's just that cannons are so strong that I feel monsters need some extra love, but maybe it's not the monsters that are too weak, but rather the cannons that are too strong.
If I had my way I would nerf cannons, make them do more reilaible damage but have a lower max damage, and somehow make them actually use the BS of the crew, which would then of course open the possibility of improving them by magic.
The extra wound is really an attempt to make monsters more distinct. I always found it a bit boring that pretty much every monster has Toughness 5, 5 wounds and WS 3.

Like with the Kroxigor, this was mostly to make them more in line with the fluff, and not a balancing change as such.

Are you referring to the LD increase of the handlers?

I'm wondering that myself, might be a brainfart

I never thought of scaling it with the army size in terms of the "Grand Armies" system (can't remeber what it's actually called), but I will definitely look into it, it's a great idea.
In general though I never saw the need to make those limits, as it's like putting all your eggs in one basket, which is just very risky. I do agree that he can get very strong, but the army will probably be quite small because of it, and the opponent will likely have a bigger army and can then flank yours, which I'm not sure the Slann can necessarily deal with alone. I just like lots of options I guess, but I'm not completely against making a limit based on points if that balances him appropriately.
ideally I would change the magic system too, but that's too big an undertaking for now.

Awesome But generally I think most would need playtesting to really get an idea of what is too strong and what is not.

So far the lore is very much W.I.P. and was made very quickly and I do agree that it is pretty boring atm. I really like your idea about sacrifices and possibly blood counters, that makes it more unique and not as niche; I'll have to look into that. Thanks

I get that, but I see the point increase as a nerf tool as well, and a big part of the project is also to make the units closer the their fluff-descriptions.
Again I cannot say I've had much success with Skinks, but if they really are that good, I could certainly nerf them; the LD increase is becuase I generally see the Lizardmen as a very steadfast race that does not really flee from combat even though they are losing. that is the impression I've gotten from everything I've read anyway; Also that they had LD 6 in 7th.
It would be awesome if you did use it, and you are very welcome to do so. The only thing I would like is that you give feedback if you do.

Thanks for the input, I really appreciate it

 

I just checked and I actually made it a bit more expensive. It was only 20 points in 8th, so I think the 25 is fine as the Scar vet got a sizable increase in points himself.
I have literally just made a brainfart in writing that I made it cheaper because I thought it used to be 30 points. The Oldblodd's cold one is 30 points so that is probably where it came from and that I made 5 points cheaper.
In addition I actually made most of his equipment options a little more expensive too.

I did not write the "changes" part when I initially made the document, so I might have missed something. I will try to go through it again to make sure I did not miss any more, so that what I have written is actually correct.

 

That is always good to hear. Still, this is still the internet, things rub people the wrong way .

I have found that, when used especially in a large numbers, they are really good. I am thinking 4+ units. This always lets you out deploy your opponent, so you can play the game on your terms. Without trying to brag, i think i showed how to use that aspect of our list at least somewhat decently, in my last battle report. I would make them 8 ppm, at least. I do not know if that is enough of a nerf though.

I do not think stupidity is that bad tbh. LD 8 coldblood is almost like LD 10 withour coldblood. I often deploy them next to my Slann, so i have LD 10 coldblood reroll for the first turn, and maybe the second. In each game, you often only have 1 or 2 times that you roll for it without Slann backup while it truly matters. Yes it really sucks when it does matter, but i feel as if all the attention on their downside is mostly because of selection bias, people tend to remember that one time while it really hurt them instead of the 10 other times when it was no problem.

I forgot they are only T4, which indeed seems pretty weird. I could get behind a T increase, even though you would need a point increase then as well. It is also interesting how this would make Skrox less good, as the Krox in the unit Skrox would get more expensive, while most hits would go on the Skinks, the T increase would not be that impactfull. Might be hard to balance them so that both units also work apart from each other.

That is understandable. I am very much focused on the competitive side of 8th, and gaming in general, so that is maybe why we come to different conclusions on some units.

Yes i do. This would not be a big buff per se, as they are often in range of my Slann. The fact remains however, that us having access to the Salamander IMHO makes our HE and DE matchups from pretty poor without a Salamander, to pretty good with the Salamander. There is just nothing like putting a flame template over a unit of Swordmasters..

I also never saw anybody doing that before, but it makes sense in a way. The main rules already accommodate this to some degree, with the larger LD bubble for your general and more duplicate rares and specials allowed.

The problem i have with giving Slann unlimited disciplines is that there are two possible scenario's in competitive play. 1) it is putting all of your eggs in one basket as you say, and it is too expensive to be good. So it will be a useless, underpowered option, and perhaps a trap for new players. Does not seem as if anyone will have fun in the scenario. In scenario 2), it is actually strong, and some combo could perhaps be found to make this work. In competitive play, that often revolves around VP's, if the frog is really unkillable, this "locks" maybe even half of the VP for the enemy, unless they wipe us. This is even worse because of the bonus for the BSB and General our Slann would get. I also do not think that games revolving around one character or model are just not that interesting, strategy gets cool, complex and fun when you have multiple moving and important parts in the game. So, it will probably not be fun to play, neither for you for your opponent. It perhaps creates the possibility for a Slann Deathstar, and there are very few people that like to play with or against a Deathstar. Deathstars are not that big of an issue in large games, as they are balanced by being only able to impact a relatively small part of the board. I do also like the idea of first generation Slann being special, and i do think we should have the most powerful wizards (it makes sense if you look at the lore). So, TLDR, i think there is just no situation in games under 3K where having a 1K Slann will be fun for anyone. If this is the case, why even make it possible?

I think the point system is a good way to nerf models, but we are not really an elite army like WOC or HE. I think you want to keep it viable to field a lot of units and models, the point system is not an answer to anything i would say. The LD buff is also a double-edged sword, because we have coldblood +1 LD is better for us than other races. I also see the LM as pretty steadfast, but Skinks are described as being skittish, so i feel that it makes sense that they would run when they are in danger without a Slann or Scarvet nearby. I also like the idea of them trying to tactically retreat, but that getting out of hand so to speak, so it turns into a full rout.

It is hard to think of more ways to nerf our models without a lot of downsides. Stat changes are pretty impactful, and i do not think you want to change our special rules because you lose that sweet nostalgia value. So i think that perhaps you need more point increases to make this work, even though it will be pretty hard to balance well.

It is no problem, i like thinking about stuff like this. Perhaps i will play a game with it once if the rules are somewhat more balanced. I would feel that i am giving myself somewhat of an unfair advantage right now if i would use these rules, perhaps i would use them as they stand if i knew if i was playing against WOC . You are welcome, keep us up to date on it!

 

That might be why, I never used more than 2 units. I will have to check out your battle report, and I will probably nerf the Skirmishers a bit then.

That is a fair point. I will revert their points cost then, but leave them with the free spears for now.

I didn't think of the Skrox unit becoming weaker, but you are correct. Maybe the Kroxigor could cost somehting like 5 points less in the skrox unit, or just leave it; they will probably still be usable.

It is great that you are focused on the competitive aspect, that gives different perspectives and might reel some of my rules back a bit to not make it overpowered.

Hmm, it should certainly still be fun to play against. Maybe the number of disciplines the Slann can take is limited by game size. So say you can take 1 discipline for each 1000 points. Maybe have 1 Discipline regardless of game size; This would mean that a Slann can only take 4 disciplines at a 3000 point game, in addition no point limit would be needed I think.
It would also make sense lorewise in that the older Slann would not be awoken if the threat isn't big.

I can get behind the argument of the Skinks retreats possibly going wrong, which justifies their LD of 5.
I do agree that the point system should only be used to nerf or buff for that matter, to a certain point, you still want to be able to field the stuff; However I do actually see part of the army as quite elite, here I'm referring to the Saurus units. I do not at all see skinks as elite, and with our Monsters it varies, and it is more about full fulling a role than being elite as such. The way I see it saurus are some of the best combat units (fluffwise) their downside is being slow and not having any options for specializing and having a small selection of different units. If you take WoC or HE they have lots of different elites and more options for specialization and a bigger part of the armies are elite.

Just use them if you feel like it, there is no pressure here . The balancing is what I want feedback for, it is almost always good with more eyes before finalizing anything.


On a bit of another note: How do you feel about a Skink Oracle hero, Kroxigor hero and Feral monsters like in TWW2?

 

rianjohnson@houseofmouse.com

Fw: The Last Jedi feedback and analysis

Sorry... couldn't help myself. Back to topic! Move along.

+1

You really do love the lore of undeath. A reasonable addition.

Kroxigor mounted on a Ripperdactyl?

 

Nice

They also do have quite flavorful rules to begin with though. If it got to the point where each unit represents their fluff well, then I would only change point values.

I'm not just trying to fix units because they were under or overpowered, I'm trying to add some flavor. I will however take into account that some of my changes are unnecessary and a point change could be better.

I like your opponent and am glad that you like the idea of it.

I didn't think of that. I only starting playing warhammer at the end of 7th, so I never saw any, but I can certainly add them.

I will change this, and probably leave them as is, since they are appropriate to the fluff on the whole. For me personally Saurus always performed better than skinks, but that is probably different from group to group, but I will assume that you are right in terms of more competitive scenes.

Regarding Saurus in general I have tried to make them more viable, but they do not get the +1 WS as standard anymore. Instead I gave a rule to saurus characters which gives any saurus unit he joins +1 WS. This should incentivise taking saurus and putting saurus characters in units instead of on their own on a cold one. Along with the buff to their LD this might make them more appealing as generals and makes them more competitive with the Slann.
It does mean that you can have WS 4 Saurus while also having WS 4 Temple Guard, but at that point one has to decide where the buff is best used.
I will also leave the LD increase for the Skink Chief, which makes him a more attractive general for full skink lists.

You raise a good point, so I will reverse this.

Yush!

I will change the price to be the same then, I will however not at this moment reverse the Toughness increase; I think it suits them.

To be honest I didn't change them because I never used them, so I'm not very familiar with them and I'm not quite sure where their problem lies. Maybe this is one of those cases where a point decrease might be the way to go.

I think I will leave their LD at 6, along with chameleon skinks, emphasizing their more elite status (however elite a skink can) just like you are stating.

I see your point. I might just remove devastating charge as an upgrade then, it is quite bad anyway. I don't know about the wound though, but i can be convinced, nothing is set in stone, part of it is also just exploring different ideas.

The Predatory fighter change is actually there, it is just in the beginning of the document, I've made it red now to emphasize that there is a change
Regarding the Bastiladon: I did consider Stubborn, but ommited it to have a greater distinction between Stegadon and Bastiladon, I will admit that it fits the monster though, so I might add it.
Regarding the solar engine I though about making it have a number of charges, where you get 1 for "free" and can then buy more, so you have to think about how many shots you might be able to get off in the battle. I just never liked bound spells.
With the ark of sotek I would make the extra swarm one can get each turn free in the sense that no roll is needed, which also simplifies it. Maybe the Bastiladon could get extra attacks as if it was a jungle swarm as well when using the ark of sotek. That would give it a bit more fighting power against weaker units while still being rather useless against tougher foes.

He agrees
You really like the undeath lore. Honestly I don't see the Slann using it, but maybe I could add it as an option to play with if the opponent agrees, to accommodate your wishes somewhat. I could then do the same for the lore of Sotek. What I would like to do then i slightly change the lore of High magic to make it different to the High elves version. I gotta admit I was dissapointed that it is basically just a copy. I wouldn't change it much, just alter it sligthly to show that it is almost the same, but that the High Elves have changed the Slann's teaching a bit over the years.

Oki Doki

A point change could have solved it true. I just felt that he was just too pathetic of a monster to begin with. He is still relatively cheap though.

Hmm okay then. What about making the Carnosaur cause fear in other large targets then, cementing its place as a monster hunter further?

I will change that right away then.

I guess I could just make him a regular wizard.
Regarding blurring the line between characters and units: I did this because of how this is also the case for the regular Troglodon, it is not a big deal for me though, so I could change it.

I will drop the Immune to Psych then. The idea behind not allowing the Kroxigor hero the be the genral was that fluff-wise they are not the smartest and it does not make much sense having them as a general, and to limit them to be a support character.

Any specific reason or just a feeling? Saurus were breed for war so it always bothered me the ones having lived for thousands of years were not particularly good at using their weapons, hence the +1 WS. the intitaive change is to make all saurus have the same initiative and cement the bad initiative as a thing for the army, while not having it as crippling as an initiative of 1, and to balance the saurus characters CC power a bit, since most other characters will attack before them.

Fair point. I will change it.

Because High Elves have it, and the Slann were the ones to teach them High magic. If we do not have it, then the High elves should not either. I might just have to update the High Elves as well then, and remove that, then I could pass with it.

He also has one lees wound not though.

You are welcome to though Just bear in mind that if you do, my philosophy with them was to make special characters more unique and bring something that a vanilla character could not; Furthermore they should be special and in general not used in place of a generic character but rather as a different way to build a list with slightly different benefits. Besides that it is just not fun to have CC Special characters beaten by generic characters. Kroq-Gar in 8th was just strictly worse than a generic oldblood on carnosaur in the majority of cases.

Ideally I would have a lot of magic items but no universal items for all races to use. I want the magic items to be unique to each faction, in addition this would also make it easier to balance the items.

I will not be dabbeling in undead Lizardmen atm. (that is more your domain anyway ) but if you have some additions like the Skink Horned one I can certainly look into giving that a go.

Can't say I know about these.

All in all I like your critique, even if I do not agree with all of it, but that was never the point of course, and would be boring and no give much discussion
I have updated the rules now though, so check it out if you want.

Ah winnning the lottery, who wouldn't want that I cannot be of much assistance with that, but for a big flying model, what about this one:

https://ksr-ugc.imgix.net/assets/02...-q=50&q=92&s=007264612bd92b74e3150842bf9a2672

I might just have to add a Quetzalcoatl as a unit now


What I am a little surprised about is that no one has commented on the increased point allowance for magic items that I gave saurus characters.


The document is now updated (I have written what the discount for each feral unit is in blue).

 

The work you have put into this is great, it really is. You’re obviously a player with real passion and I love that.

But...

I don’t think you can just buff everything because you want to, which is what I see here.

I would argue that the game is fairly balanced as it is and all these accumulative changes add up to be a huge buff overall

The only things I would have liked to see if I had a choice would be:

- A discipline option to be loremaster for any lore (I rarely pick outside of focus of mystery or wandering deliberations because of this)

- reduced movement penalty for moving and shooting on a Stegadon (again, I generally never field bolt throwers because of this and can rarely double tap blowpipes)

-kroxigor to prevent stomps on the skinks (There is no balance reason why I think this, it’s just one of those nice fluffy rules that I like the mental picture of)

- Finally - nerf cannons and volley guns a little bit. (Not Lizardmen related, but if the intention was to disregard the rules as they are then why not go nuts on other armies too?)

 

Thank you

I will have to disagree here, I did not just buff everything. On the other hand a big part of it is to make the units closer to the lore, which in by far the most cases means buffing some aspect of the unit, but buffing outright is not quite correct, since the point costs have been increased, which is a kind of nerf.
I did for instance reduce the Initiative of all Saurus Characters, and reduce the Slann's wound characteristic by 1. Most equipment for Saurus Characters is a bit more expensive as well, and I would say that the Scar vet got a substantial point increase without getting much in return.
An another note, some units were also quite bad, like the Troglodon or Carnosaur, at least in terms of their point cost, so instead of just decreasing their point costs I buffed them.
Also, I do try to keep it balanced, which is what I like feedback for, as it is not meant to buff the army as a whole, even though that might be the initial impression, because some units have been buffed, while others in total has stayed close to the same power level.

I have already made that, it is exactly the new focus of mystery

I do think that is fair to have though, since it is a strong monster in itself, and making the artillery on top better divides its role a lot and will probably make the unit worse overall since it would need a point increase; Besides I think it is very much just an additional small support tool, and should stay as such, you aren't really taking the Stegadon to use it as traditional artillery are you?. What I could do is make it so the Skink Chief's BS can be used.

Might make the unit a little too god at dealing with large targets, since you can give the Skinks poison and the Krox have high Strength, and it does not make too much sense.

I would like to do that, but atm. I am exclusively focusing on Lizardmen. In addition if I did make general changes, I would have to change the other factions along with it, and I do not have their rules, and sadly do not see how to get them.
I would however make cannons have a smaller interval of damage, making them deal more reliable damage, but have lower max. damage. Also I would find some way to make them BS dependent as most other things, which would also give more interesting play, as the cannons could then be buffed as well.

 

Awesome! I want one too but they are hella expensive.
I guess I will bask in the glory of yours if your share it when painted

I like your units ideas generally. The Skink horned rideres gives us another choice for cavalry, and light cavarly instead of ther more heavy cold one riders.

The Lurkerdons is a neat idea too.
Does the 'Sea Creature' rule actually do anything?
Personally I would have two Skinks riding it if it is to be a cheaper option, and a Saurus if it is to be buffed a bit.

Regarding the Stationary Giant Bow I would make it Strength 5 personally and give it poisoned attacks, that just fits the Lizardmen better from my perspective.
One could also make a "Bolt Thrower" that shoots lasers like the Bastiladon, and just have a stationary version.

The Catapult I do not like, To that does not fit the Lizardmen very well, though if it could be explained by something else and just have something that then shoots as a catapult I'm fine with it.

In both cases I think any potentil artillery should be weaker than what most other armies have, since the Lizardmen in my eyes is not supposed to be a long range shooty army, and should not have many options to do so lore-wise.
In friendly games however everything might be okay, so having the rules is fine by me.

I can make a separate section in the document, as an additional/optional rules section where stuff like the artillery can go.

 

I could understand wanting that, but, those are as you said only buffs. What could we nerf without making underpowered? These things are however, pretty minor. I think especially the bolt thrower buff, and the Loremaster option would be very nice. The Loremaster option would not even be that different from the current High Magic attribute, we can already get any spell we want in the way we currently play.

 

Loremaster was an indulgent suggestion

But I would have liked to see jungle swarms with the ark of sotek be a more viable strategy for example. Or for razordons to operate more like a volley gun.

I’d change ththings that mean we only realistically play a certain way.