About Khand...

MeatBoy1994 · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:03 pm

Are they any good? Anyone who has used this army; to me they seem terrible. No variety, no advantages, no nothing. So are they worth it?

fracas · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:13 pm

i am building an army of them for SBG. the new rules make them a tad better than before.

1. Kings. the combination of hero + banner is a good combination to increase the life expectancy of either apart.
2. Mounted archers: move 5" and shoot seems good to me. would use to harass and grab objective late game rather than as chargers.
3. Footman: increased Fight value to 4 while keeping Courage at 3 is good. make them a tad less vulnerable against Fight 3 opponents but they will remain vulnerable against elites. Nevertheless cheap enough to mass.
4. Captains on chariots would be good offensive weapons. regular chariots don't seem viable without the Might the captain provides.

Alies:
1. Shadowlord compensate for their lower defense value
2. Shade: to mitigate against -1 to hit from two handed weapons

whafrog · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 7:10 pm

fracas wrote:

2. Shade: to mitigate against -1 to hit from two handed weapons

...which they don't *have* to use because they have a hand weapon.

fracas · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 9:39 pm

Khand infantry has two handed weapons, not the shade
Khand infantry + shade equalizes, allowing the F4 an edge over F3 troops

GothmogtheWerewolf · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:03 pm

They don't need a blooming Shade though as Khand Warriors also have hand weapons, they don't need to use them two-handed, then they are the same. If your playing at 1000pts+ then maybe because then you get +1 to wound, but un smaller games it is not needed, is a point sink as Khand can just go one-handed and then have I think 11 more Warriors.

fracas · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:10 pm

Wargear for Khandish Warrior lists: armor and two-handed axe.

at least in my English Fallen Realms book. In addition, my SBG books does not state that two-handed weapons can be wielded as a single handed weapon, forgoing the penalty to hit and bonus to wound. Elven Blades do permit the option to wield as single handed or two handed. Khandish warriors do not have elven blades unfortunately. Only Khandish captains and kings are armed with chieftain's axe, which functions as elven blade.

cereal_theif · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:17 pm

All warriors now have hand weapons unless stated.

Khandish chief on chariot = cool
Khandish king on chariot = large banner with good counter attack BUT also BIG TARGET!!!

Khandish warriors on horse = amazing light cavalry for bow attack
I would ally them with easterlings as light cavalry n bows.

whafrog · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:42 pm

cereal_theif wrote:

All warriors now have hand weapons unless stated.

Which has been true for years now.

fracas · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:43 pm

cereal_theif wrote:

All warriors now have hand weapons unless stated.

the FAQ:

Quote:

Q: Some profiles imply that a warrior doesn’t have a hand weapon – for example, those for Elf Warriors say they have “no equipment” in their base profile. Does that mean they’re unarmed? (var)
A: All models have a hand weapon unless they’re specifically described as being “unarmed”. So Elf Warriors do have hand weapons.

I did not interpret this to suggests all models to have a hand weapon, only models that does not list having a weapon as to have a weapon.That if a weapon is listed this is the weapon the model uses.
But I can see how others would interpret this that all models have hand weapons, even bats, spiders and wargs. The interpretation that all models having hand weapons would also obviate any benefit for elven blade over that of two handed weapons.

GothmogtheWerewolf · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 10:59 pm

.It is NOT an imterpretation, nor is it open to interpretation. It clearly states that ALL models have a hand weapon unless it specifically says the model is unarmed. Khandish Warriors wargear is listed as two-handed weapon and armour. It does not say that 'the model is otherwise uunarmed", so that means it has a hand weapon. End of argument. Only an eejit would argue otherwise, plain and simple. And yes that makes Elven Blades no different from two-handed weapons but thats just the way it is, others dislike it, but it is a fact.

hithero · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:08 pm

As above, clearly states all models have hand weapons unless it says they are unarmed, and why do people always bring up that the elves are hard done by with their elven blades? Still only costs a point, the same as 2-handed weapons but the do get the benefit of being able to take an elven bow as well.

fracas · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:12 pm

GothmogtheWerewolf wrote:

It is NOT an imterpretation, nor is it open to interpretation. It clearly states that ALL models have a hand weapon unless it specifically says the model is unarmed. Khandish Warriors wargear is listed as two-handed weapon and armour. It does not say that 'the model is otherwise uunarmed", so that means it has a hand weapon. End of argument. Only an eejit would argue otherwise, plain and simple.

how civil!
if you chooses to be insulting, at least demonstrate the balls and intelligence to spell your insult in English.

btw, I believe it would be nonsensical to list a model's war gear as "two handed axe and otherwise unarmed" or "two handed axe and unarmed" if you elect to require the wording "unarmed" in the listing. I guess alternatively it could be listed as "two handed axe without a hand weapon" but this wouldn't include the "unarmed" wording per FAQ. AFAIK there are also no model that lists a weapon and unarmed or a weapon and otherwise unarmed or a (non-hand) weapon without a hand weapon.

GothmogtheWerewolf · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:15 pm

FYI until recently the Clansmen of Lamedon werelistted as having two-handed weapons but being otherwise unarmed, thus they had to use two-handed weapons, but nothing else does. Raed properly please. And al=t least listen to hitheroo, he is meuch more knowledgeable than you. And eejit is an English word, and the implications are heavy that you are an eejit for not listening to common sense, I am annoyed with you, hence the insult, you are wrong, please accept that. Listen to what everyone says.

fracas · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:19 pm

hithero wrote:

As above, clearly states all models have hand weapons unless it says they are unarmed, and why do people always bring up that the elves are hard done by with their elven blades? Still only costs a point, the same as 2-handed weapons but the do get the benefit of being able to take an elven bow as well.

so why in the Khand section would there be any difference to Chieftain's axe from two handed axe?

GothmogtheWerewolf · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:20 pm

There is no difference. GW is just plain stupid that all. Some would argue that GW hate elves, I jthink they just didn't think it through.

fracas · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:23 pm

Eejit is not an English word.

If you are talking common sense, then common sense tells me
1. bats do not wield hand weapons
2. wargs do not wield hand weapons.
3. spiders do not wield hand weapons.

your arguments are not strengthened by
incivility
insults
appeals to numerical superiority

hithero · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:26 pm

fracas wrote:

hithero wrote:

As above, clearly states all models have hand weapons unless it says they are unarmed, and why do people always bring up that the elves are hard done by with their elven blades? Still only costs a point, the same as 2-handed weapons but the do get the benefit of being able to take an elven bow as well.

so why in the Khand section would there be any difference to Chieftain's axe from two handed axe?

A Chieftains Axe is an elven blade (go figure, but run with it

) and allows then to take a bow as well, which is just as well as all the chief models have both. As I stated above actually

GothmogtheWerewolf · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:26 pm

In the old version of the rules, Wargs, Bats and Spider were listed as having hand weaopons.

FOr example. Giant Spider - Wargear: Vicious mandibles (hand weapon)
Warg - Wargear: Teeth and Claws (counts as a hand weapon)

These are the exact wording listed in the books.

Eejit is an English word, but please excuse my temper, you are infuriating me.

You are still wrong I'm afraid although I often wish otherwise.

fracas · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:30 pm

Quote:

Q: Some profiles imply that a warrior doesn’t have a hand weapon – for example, those for Elf Warriors say they have “no equipment” in their base profile. Does that mean they’re unarmed? (var)
A: All models have a hand weapon unless they’re specifically described as being “unarmed”. So Elf Warriors do have hand weapons.

Lets look at this.
the question has two parts, a sentence and a question. the question is emboldened.
the answer cannot be a response to a sentence, only the question.
thus simplified:

Quote:

Q: Does that (a warrior doesn’t have a hand weapon) mean they’re unarmed? (var)
A: All models have a hand weapon unless they’re specifically described as being “unarmed”.

hithero · **Posted:** Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:31 pm

Fracas, when the rules came out there was a big question by pretty much everybody on what the hell was going on with this dumb rule. But basically they made a big cock up by changing rules and not all the profiles to suit and ruled this way to cover up the errors. All models do have hand weapons in addition to the listed wargear, unless it says otherwise as prooved above with the clansman example.

Of course though, as we now have all new profiles and wargear is written differently, when the new rules come out they may drop this rule.

About Khand...

Who is online