JamesR wrote:
"Every other hero" is kind of misleading. Less than 50% of heroes can take mounts in SBG.
Personally I don't think that's an oversight
Oh yeah, sorry, I meant "every other hero
that has a horse as a wargear option." It's one of those cases of me knowing what I
meant, but not being specific enough. Basically, I was just suggesting that the points should be the same as any other hero who can take a mount.
I don't think it was an oversight, either, but I also don't think it was done for balance considerations. I think that for the most part they just give the option of riding a mount to characters who were seen riding one in the movies (or in the case of made-up or book-derived characters, if it makes sense to them at the time).
Some elves being mounted does sound pretty scary, from a rules perspective, but then so does the Balrog, or Sauron, or a Mordor Troll Chieftan, or Azog mounted, for that matter. In my experience, no matter how scarry a good hero looks on paper, they almost always fall to superior numbers of evil models if they're not adequately supported by their own troops, and that's almost doubly true for cavalry heroes because of the likelihood of them leading the attack. If the battle (or priority) swings against you, they're that much more likely to get isolated and pulled down. I dunno, try it and see. After playing with him in several games, if you find that a mounted Gil-Galad is truly that unbeatable, then don't allow it.
jdizzy001 wrote:
Personally, i could careless about mounted heroes. Its mounted magic users that are challenging. All of a sudden gandalf's sorc blast has a max range of 24"! If that isnt enough, now he can race forward 6", cast a spell, the. Retreat back behind his shield wall!
Can't Gandalf (and Saruman) already do that?