CO Qualifier > maxminis.com- D&D minis, 4th edition D&D

Subject: CO Qualifier

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Author

Messages

Wrackspawn
ChristopherGroves
Warlord
Warlord

6093 Posts

05/30/2006 12:33 PM
quote: Originally posted by Dagni quote: Originally posted by ChristopherGroves It's about time people stopped saying "rogue" CG bands. That's a mixed CG band using pretty solid pieces all-around. No one listens to me though ... Nah, when was the last time that the Warchanter saw play? I mean, Improved Countersong is a lot worse since War Drums, too. That alone makes it a rogue band, even if CG isn't, in general. Likewise, are you saying that Dwayne's Dragonne band wasn't rogue? - Dagni Dunno. I purchased three Dragonnes a few weeks back myself. Foolish maybe, but not rogue ... Does being on the outskirts and tested, yet not proven make it rogue? What if a sizeable chunk of players are still testing / tweaking CG? What's their appearance rate? More to the point ... Would I say someone who showed up with an "LE quad" was using a "rogue" band? I'd just call it a mixed quad / quint right? But if it's CG it is automatically labeled rogue ... I think this boils down to two issues I have: (1) I don't think (and haven't thought) CG is as "lost" as everyone else seems to think (and their moderate success confirms this). Are they the ugly kid at the dance, getting the least attention? Maybe ... but they still have a few moves. And, if the data is any indication, THEY STILL SHOW UP WITH DECENT FREQUENCY. How is that rogue? (2) For some reason, people simply can't / won't say a "CG quad" or "quint" or whatever. Maybe it is because they have 30-ish point tech options (moreso than any other faction) so you're removing a hitter in favor of more tech. Regardless, if I put together a band that had a Marshal, HEBI, Goliath, Rikka and something else making a 4th hitter for some reason folks would call it a CG rogue band ... any other faction they'd call it a LE quad or an LG mixed-quad.

Triangle DDM Skirmish Group \| My Email \| 45-ish trades and counting \| Stuff for Trade *** * * Show your brother some love and click here * * ***

sienar
Sergeant

640 Posts

05/30/2006 12:45 PM
quote: Originally posted by ChristopherGroves quote: Originally posted by Dagni quote: Originally posted by ChristopherGroves It's about time people stopped saying "rogue" CG bands. That's a mixed CG band using pretty solid pieces all-around. No one listens to me though ... Nah, when was the last time that the Warchanter saw play? I mean, Improved Countersong is a lot worse since War Drums, too. That alone makes it a rogue band, even if CG isn't, in general. Likewise, are you saying that Dwayne's Dragonne band wasn't rogue? - Dagni Dunno. I purchased three Dragonnes a few weeks back myself. Foolish maybe, but not rogue ... Does being on the outskirts and tested, yet not proven make it rogue? What if a sizeable chunk of players are still testing / tweaking CG? What's their appearance rate? More to the point ... Would I say someone who showed up with an "LE quad" was using a "rogue" band? I'd just call it a mixed quad / quint right? But if it's CG it is automatically labeled rogue ... I think this boils down to two issues I have: (1) I don't think (and haven't thought) CG is as "lost" as everyone else seems to think (and their moderate success confirms this). Are they the ugly kid at the dance, getting the least attention? Maybe ... but they still have a few moves. And, if the data is any indication, THEY STILL SHOW UP WITH DECENT FREQUENCY. How is that rogue? (2) For some reason, people simply can't / won't say a "CG quad" or "quint" or whatever. Maybe it is because they have 30-ish point tech options (moreso than any other faction) so you're removing a hitter in favor of more tech. Regardless, if I put together a band that had a Marshal, HEBI, Goliath, Rikka and something else making a 4th hitter for some reason folks would call it a CG rogue band ... any other faction they'd call it a LE quad or an LG mixed-quad. I would agree that Dragonnes and Warchanter are filling in the rogue role. They don't fit into the 'contemporary archetype of a "tier 1" warband', which I think is a good definition or 'rogue'. It does not mean they are strong or weak warbands (that will take time to prove), but they are not expected to show, and certainly not anticipated as going to succeed. CG is taking a hit in perceived power level. That keeps it out of the definition of 'contemporary archetype of a "tier 1" warband'. So, by that, I would say, most CG builds would fill a 'rogue' role.

[http://www.hordelings.com/frontend/profiles/profile.php?user_id=22]

Dagni
Sergeant

870 Posts

05/30/2006 5:28 PM
quote: Originally posted by ChristopherGroves (2) For some reason, people simply can't / won't say a "CG quad" or "quint" or whatever. Maybe it is because they have 30-ish point tech options (moreso than any other faction) so you're removing a hitter in favor of more tech. Regardless, if I put together a band that had a Marshal, HEBI, Goliath, Rikka and something else making a 4th hitter for some reason folks would call it a CG rogue band ... any other faction they'd call it a LE quad or an LG mixed-quad. Imagine a band that uses only Helmed Horrors. 3, maybe 4 of them. Now imagine a band that uses only Chraals. Let's say 4. Ok, or a band that uses 4-5 Duergar Champions. Maybe a band that uses 4 Zakya Rakshasas. Except maybe that last one, these are all normal bands that we've all seen at tournaments many, many times!! So how can a band that mixes and matches, but ONLY from among those options, be a rogue band?? Likewise, the Gauth is proven, and while I'm less convinced on the Efreeti, he's not so surprising that he'd be called rogue, unless it was a band with 3+ Efreeti. A band with 4 Longstrider Rangers? Rogue! 4 Renegade Warlocks? 3+ Wand Experts, or 4 Celestial Pegasi? These are rogue band concepts, that we do NOT see at tournaments, or specifically remember the ONE time we heard about a 4 Longstrider band that did well. Go-Go Goliaths is less rogue, but was never too popular, and generally regarded as past its time. FBs aren't rogue at all, in any way. Inspiring Marshal is so good, one can almost call ANY band that doesn't use him as rogue, and we all know the very few commanders that are even worth considering as arguably worth using over the IM, like the Greenfang or Ryld. CE, again, if a band with 4 Red Sams is viable, who's going to argue the inclusion of one? 3 Eyes, 3 Orc Champs, maybe not 3 Ravagers, but one is fine. Heck, in my opinion, any CE quad may well be worse than most CG builds... but we've all seen CE quad at major tournaments, for years, and as recently the most popular build in the game as Angelfire! What's rogue about that? The Wand Expert and almost every non- FB, Goliath, Rikka, Aspect of Kord, or Inspiring Marshal - every piece in CG that isn't one of those few (and a couple I missed, like Crow Shaman) is completely unproven in tournaments. Look at the top 4 warbands list for individual creatures that have only shown up in 1 or 2 different bands. I'll bet that more than half of the 25+ point range creatures that have only shown up in one or two top 4 bands will be CG. That in spite of the fact that, yes, CG is still seeing reasonable success and reasonable numbers. I attribute some of that, however, to the fact that it IS rogue! When people see something that is dismissed from the DDM groupthink, but is about as viable as what IS approved by the community, it makes them want to try it out, prove that it's viable. I really don't think Dwayne would've used Dragonnes if they were one of the most popular builds in the meta right now. I consider Dwayne a rogue warband builder - so anything he plays almost by definition is rogue! [:P] - Dagni

Proud member of the GRUUMSH fan club!

Wrackspawn
ChristopherGroves
Warlord
Warlord

6093 Posts

05/30/2006 6:48 PM
"Rogue pieces" yes. "Rogue band" no. A Quad is a Quad. It could be four Half Fiend Ogres people would still call it a CE quad. They may call it a "strange CE quad" but the rogue tag is reserved for CG only for some silly reason. Actually, I think the reason is they don't have many recognizable, core, repeatable 30-40 point serious components. The key is repeatable/serious. If someone showed up with four Longstriders I'd say that was a gimmick quad, like four Catfolk Wilders. Doomed to fail, but it is still a quad. Now we're getting into a different area, and maybe because it is one I've thought about a fair amount recently (actual warband types) I'm hypersensitve. A quad is a quad, regardless of faction. Commander + multi-hitter plays the same in any faction with some variance given to specific creatures. Sorry for the hijack. I'll start a thread in skirmish with my thoughts.

Triangle DDM Skirmish Group \| My Email \| 45-ish trades and counting \| Stuff for Trade *** * * Show your brother some love and click here * * ***

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 2 of 2

Forums > Dungeons & Dragons Miniatures > D&D Minis - Tournaments > CO Qualifier

ActiveForums 3.7