Making Zealots Worth It?

Hello all!

After getting some software that allows me to edit PDFs, I've started a "rogue" rules review and edit of the core rulebook (for the use of myself and my gaming group only, of course). We've hit a bit of a snag when it comes to Witch Hunters. Everybody agrees that the warband size should be increased to match the mercenary warbands but nobody has ever seen a Witch Hunters warband that uses Zealots and we'd like to remedy that.

My proposal was simply to not allow flagellants to get "the lad's got talent". Our Witch Hunter player was not too pleased with that, though. We discussed giving Zealots frenzy or certain stat increases, or reducing their cost, but none of them seemed like they would cause somebody to hire them rather than maxing out on hounds and flagellants...

So, I submit it to you - what can be done that makes Zealots competitive with Flagellants and Warhounds?

I think a cap on flagellants already makes zealots vable so long as the warband size in increased to 15.

This means there would be the usual choice of strong animal, or weaker warrior who gains experience.

I think giving witch hunters a 2-for-one discount on torches would not be out of the question, or even "all heroes get a free torch every game."

Thanks for the quick reply, Dubstyles!

I wondered if that would make them worth it, though they still seem a bit pricey at 20gc - maybe a reduction to "youngblood" cost would be in order?

And the torch idea is very characterful - maybe I'll add it in!

this is just a thought but maybe you could do something like your warband may never have more flagellants than zealots? i'm not sure if this could be rectified fluff wise but it would ensure that there would at least be 5 zealots in any given warband. or maybe a warhound to zealot thing would be better? anyway just a thought.

Sparking off the suggestions so far, how about cutting zealot's cost to 15 GC, giving them a paid-for torch option for that fluffy village mob feel and giving them the "Not Orcs" rule (each zealot lost counts as half a casualty for rout test purposes)? Call it something different like "Expendable" and prove that witch hunters, like Englishmen, are more bothered about their dogs than other people.

Citizen Shade, I think you may be on to something!

Zealot - 15gc
Profile - As is
Special Rule: Rabble
Witch hunters care very little for the urchins and untouchables that follow in their wake and are even known for feeding their dogs better than their zealous followers. To represent this, each Zealot counts as only half a model for the purposes of overall warband strength and determining if the warband has suffered enough casualties to take a rout test. Note that they still count as full models when determining warband rating and income!
A Zealot that becomes a hero due to a The Lad's Got Talent! roll loses this special rule.

If I go with this, I think I'll leave the maximum warband size at 12.

Though that could make for a warband of 6 heroes and 12 zealots... pretty large, though generally low in quality.

I'm toying with the idea of giving all witch hunters a permanent torch as part of their "burn the witch!" rule.

What do you think?

I like the torch idea, although then it becomes an issue as to which rules for torches you use...

toooooo many special rules

4 2 2 3 3 1 3 1 6 15gc

Increasing the cost of Warhounds might help, currently having superior stats at a cheaper price.

I actually re-did the whole witch hunters list for my house rules. If I remember correctly, i shaved one point off of the zealots LD and gave them 1 point in BS.

This was because they were essentially worthless with missile weapons with BS 2. Even with a BS upgrade they'd still max out at BS 3 which was decidedly mediocre.

I tweaked the fluff to suggest that witch hunters specifically looked for men who were good with a bow. This gives witch hunters a bit more firepower, although the zealots are never going to be super great.

Honestly, these people who want to force the witch hunter player to use zealots by weakening their other choices! Sadists.

Quote :

i shaved one point off of the zealots LD and gave them 1 point in BS.

This
was because they were essentially worthless with missile weapons with
BS 2. Even with a BS upgrade they'd still max out at BS 3 which was
decidedly mediocre.

At least with BS 3 they would have a purpose. You'd need to raise the warband size to fifteen as well though.

BEST WITCH HUNTER TWEAK

Witch Hunters 4 starting xp

Wardogs 20gc

Zealots 20gc
+1 ws

there are many ways to tweak flagellants, all involve giving them LD6 and ItP

thereafter:

what we have now is 40gc S4 A1 and two weapons that cost 15gc - essentially 55gc resting on one attack. that makes the games very luck-based

therefore, I think the best tweak would be this:

Flaggelants 35gc
M4 WS2 BS2 S2(!) T3 W1 I3 A2(!) Ld6
Immune to Psych
Special Rule: Crazed: Flaggalants cannot gain extra attacks through experience advances until they become heroes. They are already crazed.

thus you now have 50gc resting on two S4 attacks - much more in line with other prices

Uh, no thanks. That sounds like a good way of sinking flagellants completely.

sinking? - getting two S4 attakcs is hardly sinking?

Asp wrote:

toooooo many special rules

And what, pray tell, is not allowing flagellants attack advances until they get promoted if not a special rule?

Moving on, on the face of it, two S4 attacks doesn't sound too shoddy. However, what you're actually proposing is two S4 attacks in the first round of combat only (with flails) or striking last with two-handers. That fact, and the lack of precedent for S2 humans in Mordheim, is likely to be hard to sell to witch hunter players.

I think that if you want to tweak flagellants by dropping their strength and upping their attacks, you're better off using the Dark Soul profile and cost with the S and T profiles reversed (i.e. S3 and T4) and expanding the weapon choices to include ones that you can dual wield. This gives the player options i.e. a single high strength attack or two lower strength ones.

Quote :

And what, pray tell, is not allowing flagellants attack advances until they get promoted if not a special rule?

Well, i removed the mess of original special rules, replacing it with one line. A special rule, yes, but also a net gain

forgot about flails running out of steam. S3 it is, then

the cap on attacks is neceassry, no henchmen should have A3, but then agian, henchmen should not be able to gain attacks advances at all as it unbalances the game (one player getting +5A to his warbnad through a lucky roll, the other getting some other stat)

Actually zealots WORTH their price.
They are the only witch hunters' troop choice who can be equipped with the warband's equipment (flagellants can only be equipped with flails and two handed weapons and dogs can't obviously be equipped at all)

They act as the "common troopling" each band can count on (like henchmen, sisters of sigmar and every 25gc-worth base human profile, only with -1 on WS and BS and -5 to their price).

Raising the warband limit to 15 will balance things automatically.

My 2 cents, as WH were my first wb, so they hold a special place in my heart:

1) 15 max number of warriors

2) Zealots, 20gc
M4; WS2; BS2; S3; T3; W1; I3; A1; Ld7
Hatred (against all evil and chaos related models? even against everybody... up to you)

3) Flaggies, 0-5, 40gc
M4; WS2; BS2; S3; T4; W1; I3; A2; Ld9 (as 9 is the max for humans)
Can't LGT
Immune to psychology
(Maybe drop to T3 and save 5gc, or up the overall cost)

4) Warhounds, 0-5, 20gc(?)
M6; WS4; BS0; S3; T3; I4; A1; Ld5
Animals
(This one is optional and not well considered, maybe dogs can stay as they are?)

Cheers!!!

Quote :

I think a cap on flagellants already makes zealots vable so long as the warband size in increased to 15.

This means there would be the usual choice of strong animal, or weaker warrior who gains experience.

Couldn't agree with that more. Keep it simple.

15 max size.

Flagellants max of 5, that means 10/11 max models of Heroes and Flagellants. So that would leave 4-5 spaces for Zealots or warhounds. As Zealots gain exp and can have bows I think there would be mix.

I have seen some other threads where people talk about WH warbands. There seems to be a mix of people who prefer Zezalots and people who prefer warhounds.

I still don't see why anyone would want to make flagellants worse than they are now.

Nurgle's Bratwurst Bugle wrote:

As Zealots gain exp and can have bows I think there would be mix.

I honestly can't see how gaining experience makes them better than warhounds, since they start so far behind them stat-wise. All they really have over warhounds is multiple attacks.

I like the idea of zealots, but unless they start with BS 3 I can't see a use for them.

Von Kurst wrote:

I like the torch idea, although then it becomes an issue as to which rules for torches you use...

I would recommend the most recent rules, i assume they overwrite the old ones right? I only know about the Empire in Flames version, there are more?

Hum.
No comments about giving Hatred to Zealots (and to whom they should hate)?

I find it:

1) very much streamlined with their fluff (please, check their fluff text, below hiring cost).

2) balanced cost-wise, depending on whom they hate (yes, debatable). They get 2 stats below warrior norm (WS and BS), so I take it as twice -5gc from their hiring cost (so that's -10gc from the 25gc standard warrior). A well considered Hatred special rule could catch up that 5 gc to reach their current 20gc cost.

3) streamlined with their original intended purpose (I guess), as they remain poor shooters (which is good even though people want them more shooty), but get that little more in CC, which is what they're for, usually. This also falls in the warband overall balance, as having Zeals as good shooters coupled with crossbowing hunters would turn the band in a shooting terror...

The free torch idea is fluffy, but not much in the stream of rules, for what are my perspectives. I'd call it a clunky solution, and I think something better can be done.
Granted, torches should be in the equipment lists for both hunters and zeals (and maybe changed to 5gc "not one-shot" items), but that's way different.

My very quick 2 cents anyway. Waiting for your input!

Cheers!!!

P.S.: Flaggies, another subject I shared my perspective...

Pathfinder Dubstyles wrote:

I think a cap on flagellants already makes zealots vable so long as the warband size in increased to 15.

This means there would be the usual choice of strong animal, or weaker warrior who gains experience.

I think giving witch hunters a 2-for-one discount on torches would not be out of the question, or even "all heroes get a free torch every game."

Indeed increase it to 15. You have 5 Heroes and 5 flagelants = 10...
That means you have to fill it with 5 more...
Warhounds are good to start with but don't gain exp...
So in the longrun Zealots will become better then the "stupid" dog.

Just my thoughts.

SeiFeR-NL wrote:

Pathfinder Dubstyles wrote:

I think a cap on flagellants already makes zealots vable so long as the warband size in increased to 15.

This means there would be the usual choice of strong animal, or weaker warrior who gains experience.

I think giving witch hunters a 2-for-one discount on torches would not be out of the question, or even "all heroes get a free torch every game."

Indeed increase it to 15. You have 5 Heroes and 5 flagelants = 10...
That means you have to fill it with 5 more...
Warhounds are good to start with but don't gain exp...
So in the longrun Zealots will become better then the "stupid" dog.

Just my thoughts.

I think the problem is that a Zealot that has increased all of his increasable stats still falls short of the dog in hand to hand - the fact that the dog's movement is 6 makes it much better in the long run. Combine that with the fact that the Zealot won't be adding much ballistically with a maximum BS is 3 (and rightfully so) and the dogs are cheaper, easier to replace, and better than the zealots even with five open slots in the warband.

From a "power-gamer" perspective, I'd go warhounds for all five.

If I had to choose between 2 dogs and 5 zealots, however, I'd probably choose the zealots (or 1 dog and 2 zealots).

EDIT: That is, of course, only the basic profile - I understand that Zealots can be equipped with armour and weapons that will give them a bit of an edge over the hound, but they'd be a lot more expensive and you'd really feel it every time one of them bought the farm.

I was wonder if a profile change to this would be suitable?

4 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 - 1 - 3 - 1 - 6

So not a bad fighter but still not as disciplined as a proper soldier?