Challenges in 7th... a good change for us?

[Brother Mayhem]

Hey all,

 

I was reading the rules changes on BoLS, and one thing I noticed was the change to challenges. The quote is:

 

'Adam says, "When a character wins a challenge, the wounds they cause carry over to the unit.' ".

 

Does this make the 'Champions of Chaos' rule much more useful? Or has it changed much at all in how our characters deal with challenges?

[tdemayo]

If you're winning, it makes it better.  If you're losing it makes it worse.  The biggest problem with the Champions of Chaos rule is that it forces our characters into challenges they cannot win.  (And thus into unfavorable morale tests).  So I'd say this makes the problem worse.

[Chaeron]

As tdemayo alludes to, we'd have to be winning them first.

[RolandTHTG]

It makes Lords better. No sgt tar-pits to soak up charge bonuses. 
It makes champions slightly worse, as they can't tarpit themselves or hold up an IC while the lord deals with the squad. 

[totgeboren]

I'm thinking like this. If my Terminators assault a Hive Tyrant, getting ready to make mince meat out of it with their powerfists and lighting claws, what happens now is that my Champ has to challenge and then dies, denying my squad the ability to attack thereby robbing them of their bonus attacks and then forcing them to pass a Ld check at -1. If the above rumour is the only real difference that mean that they would lose not only the champ, but a few more guys, while still denying them the ability to attack and ensuring that they definitely break and are overrun.

I have never been challenged-blocked by minor characters in 6ed, but my champs have often suicide-martyred themselves and messed up the ability of the rest of their squads to attack for no apparent cause. This change seems to make the problem even worse.

However, if we are really really lucky, an MCs can only become locked in a challenge with another MC. That would fix most of the really glaring problems with challenges. But I think that it way to much to hope for, especially since I would have preferred them to remove challenges altogether. It's so incredibly uncinematic most of the time is really reduces my enjoyment of the game.

[Hellrender]

I have been plenty times assault blocked. Like challenging with my lord and taken on by a sergeant. or worse, challenging with a champion and then taking the character on. Either way i got no proper choice, as my opponent can choose with what to accept! 

 

Now atleast i can just challenge with my juggerlord and all his (normally 8ish) wounds carry over onto the squad the sergeant belongs to XD So for me, the biggest issue with that is solved.

 

On the other hand (as said before me) i normally keep my cultists alive for an additional turn (which has won me a game or 2) by challenging with the leader when the opponent thought he would make quick meat out of them. This now no longer works, unless i really do have invisibility on them (which was before a bonus)

[Iron Skull Mask]

Daemon weapons get better, champions even worse. Totgeboren gave a good example for the latter.

[daveNYC]

Wasn't there something about multiple challenges in a single combat, or was that nixed?  

[Hellrender]

No, it was about a Tactical Objective card, earning 1 VP if you launched 1 Challenge that turn, OR D3 VP, if you launched 3+ challenges that turn. It didnt mention anything about having challenge rules changed, so its rather safe to assume, the card indicates you have to challenge with multiple champions at the same time, at different targets. 

[Trevak Dal]

If you're winning, it makes it better.  If you're losing it makes it worse.  The biggest problem with the Champions of Chaos rule is that it forces our characters into challenges they cannot win.  (And thus into unfavorable morale tests).  So I'd say this makes the problem worse.

 

Yeah, it pretty much nixes my Sneaky plan of a horde of MSU khorne beserkers (fearless, unupgraded) to just jam into enemy nasty Monstrous creatures and just challenge Chump them over, and over again until they finally kill all the champs and then roll with the Krak grenades.  I really wish we got the option of taking a champion like before instead of just having one.

[daveNYC]

No, it was about a Tactical Objective card, earning 1 VP if you launched 1 Challenge that turn, OR D3 VP, if you launched 3+ challenges that turn. It didnt mention anything about having challenge rules changed, so its rather safe to assume, the card indicates you have to challenge with multiple champions at the same time, at different targets. 

 

I hope that's the case.  I thought the rumor had been talking about being able to have multiple challenges in the same CC, so against a unit with multiple characters, there'd be no more having our mook squad leader guy tanking the IC while our main man ate up the rest of the squad.

[Ishagu]

I've heard that wounds don't carry over and remove units, but the overkill wounds carry over for morale checks...

[daboarder]

either way is bad for us

[RolandTHTG]

I'll take the morale penalty over the actual wounds any day. While it hurts regular CSM, There are a number of ways to get fearless (Lord escort, Icon, cult troops, powers) that can shrug off the morale modifier. Plus, if those models are still alive and fighting the opposing lords escort, they may kill some and make the test not that bad. Just taking the wounds is much worse than the morale penalty.

[Hellrender]

I dont understand what is wrong with letting wounds carry over?

 

There are not that many things that do that much damage, most characters have only 4-5 attacks. We chaos on the other hand, can have characters with up to 13 attacks! So while the enemy will kill your sergeant, and then maybe 2-3 normal dudes, our Lord can kill the Sergeant (or cheap HQ) and still beat the whole squad in one turn.