8th Ed. Scalenex finally joins the Consensus, I'm done with Saurus Warriors

[Scalenex]

If I had a say in a revised LM book. I would endorse all of these things in order of preference.

1) Make Saurus Warriors cost one point less per model
2) Allow Saurus to takes Marks of the Old Ones similar in points cost and power level to Warriors of Chaos
3) Let one Saurus Warrior block per army take a magic banner up to 25 points
4) Give SW the option for hand weapon and shield, spear and shield, additional hand weapons, all at the same cost.
5) Make them Initiative 2

Any one of the five things would drastically change my liking toward Sauri, except for number five which would be nice but is not a huge thing.

I agree with Agrem that making TG WS5 would be a bit much so I wouldn't feel comfortable making Core Saurus Warriors WS4.

I would want to make Temple Guard cost one point less per model and give them a 6+ Ward save versus Slann miscasts or an optional magic banner that provides a 4+ Ward Save against Slann miscasts. Slann should be able to restrain Predatory Fighters, at least Temple Guard units they have joined.

 

[GCPD]

EDIT: @GCPD do you take one or 2 units of them? And do you go 5 or 6 wide when compressed?

One unit atm. I could happily get a second because they are so cheap and still fit in two Skirmisher units without going significantly over minimum Core, but I like to have a couple of 12-15 sized Cohorts running about and getting up to mischief as well.

6 wide when compressed, if only for the extra stand and shoot and, well, it looks nicer! More often than not though, they are facing things with only one rank or less (monsters, Cav, Monstrous Cavalry, single model characters, chariots) and so can go 10 wide to maximise javelin shots.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

1) Make Saurus Warriors cost one point less per model
2) Allow Saurus to takes Marks of the Old Ones similar in points cost and power level to Warriors of Chaos
3) Let one Saurus Warrior block per army take a magic banner up to 25 points
4) Give SW the option for hand weapon and shield, spear and shield, additional hand weapons, all at the same cost.
5) Make them Initiative 2

These are all great. I would love to have spawnings back! A magic banner would be nice too.

In regards to temple guard, I'd love to see a rule where a Slann cannot be challenged as long as there a sufficient numbers of temple guard to keep him out of base to base contact. And speaking of Slann, they should be able to restrain models with predatory fighter just like skink characters do.

 

[Scalenex]

And speaking of Slann, they should be able to restrain models with predatory fighter just like skink characters do.

The fluff reason to not do that is because the Slann is too focused on the big picture to bother issuing such a restraint command. The Old Ones gave the Saurus their ferocity, it might insult them to try to restrain it. The crunch reason to not do that is because Saurus blocks are near the Slann most of the time. That would practically make PF drawbacks a non-issue, but I do think Temple Guard should have restraint. Fluffwise, they are ALL about the discipline.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

The fluff reason to not do that is because the Slann is too focused on the big picture to bother issuing such a restraint command

In a battle, being focused on the big picture is giving the right commands to keep your units in optimum position. If the Slann can't do it, I can't imagine a skink being up to the challenge.

 

[Rettile]

In regards to temple guard, I'd love to see a rule where a Slann cannot be challenged as long as there a sufficient numbers of temple guard to keep him out of base to base contact.

this. This, this, this, 1000 times THIS. "We're a wonderful bodyguard unit, yeah, we'll never let our Slann die! But hey, if an enemy so-badass-looking guy just wants to have a friendly conversation with him who are we to stop our lord make some new friends? Hey look, what are they doing? Oooooh, they're probably dancing together! No, wait... errr... is that... blood?!... oh. -long silence- Hey, we're not stubborn anymore. FLEE!"

 

[GhostWarrior]

In regards to temple guard, I'd love to see a rule where a Slann cannot be challenged as long as there a sufficient numbers of temple guard to keep him out of base to base contact. And speaking of Slann, they should be able to restrain models with predatory fighter just like skink characters do.

It would have been easy enough to do the dwarf hammerer rule - where Temple Guard could accept challenges so long as the Slann was alive. There had even been plenty of precedent for that type of rule from 2 other books before the Lizard book had even come out (Bret Grail Knights and DoC Beasts).

 

[Mr Phat]

im still on the "saurus should have been longbeards" statement..
It also eludes me why they did not bring back spawnings....

another thing that would change everything for saurus (imo) would be for them to deal with high armor.
The 2+(1/6) attacks with WS3 per model is honestly sufficient for me.
The problem in my view is that they just chip of everything that should be considered a good match-up.

S4 has a hard time wounding things, let alone deal with anything close to a decent armor save.

 

[Bainbow]

To be honest, Saurus running with a horde and spears with some magic support is a risky strategy, but if done right then it really can pay off. Sure with a WS of 3 I'm only hitting half my attacks, and against an average T3 I'm only wounding on two thirds of my hits, not factoring in armour. But the sheer volume of attacks that you can rail off with a spear horde can be very extreme, it's rare that I attack fewer than thirty times and can reach upwards of sixty attacks if the stars align. And with support from the lore of light, you can get ASF +1A, or WS10 I10, or if you get lucky with dice you can get both which lets you hit on 3s with rerolls. Sure there are heavy risks with this strategy, but I tend to win far more often than not with it because I'm very aware of all its weaknesses and make moves to counter my opponent's attempts to exploit those weaknesses. And as it's a rather unorthodox strategy, most opponents either get thrown off or underestimate it, both cases allowing me to spring traps with supporting units.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

It would have been easy enough to do the dwarf hammerer rule - where Temple Guard could accept challenges so long as the Slann was alive. There had even been plenty of precedent for that type of rule from 2 other books before the Lizard book had even come out (Bret Grail Knights and DoC Beasts).

Exactly! That would be a perfect solution for the whole situation.

 

[TheTrans]

I play 2 lizarmen players in my local Meta who both have big saurus blocks. I'd just like to note I reckon they're decently costed, compared to say my 'fighty' core which is ghouls. You have S/T4, 4+ save, 6+ parry, 2 attacks each with possibility of more from the front rank at the cost of..is it 5.5 slaves?

Either way I feel they're priced well, problem is they pale compared to Warriors, but they are undercosted as hell.

 

[Mr Phat]

I play VC too.
Ghouls are not a fighting unit as far as I see it.
Its a unit meant to thin out a key matchup, for your Vamp to have a easier time taking it down later.
that or monster killing, which they do quite well in my experience.
I dont take those anymore either though

Saurus is a completly different choice, and I dont think you can compare. The poison + "no save" gives that away.

 

[Skinquisitor]

My opinion didnt change during the ages... it takes too much effort turn the warriors into effective block. I rather put this effort in offensive spell casting (but thats just my personal preference). I think, their weak spot is the mobility. Being a regular m4 infantry, most of the cases they are just marching up and down the field, searching for enemies they can take on, even worse trying to avoid a stronger unit. Thats just a waste of time and points. Even if the skinks do less damage, they are almost always able to shoot at something, causing casulties.
Back to mobility. The current high-end lists are built around being mobile. If you are who picks the fights, you win. It doesnt take to much effort to figure out: against your warriors, your opponent will bring something that can beat it. If he/she makes it into combat... you just lost a lots of points. Aye, aye... you can redirect, bait, etc etc...But what is it at the end? Casulties. You sacrifice them to save a more expensive unit. But consider this: if there is no fragile unit, you dont have to sacrifice skinks, capable of doing damage.

 

[Putzfrau]

I think Saurus just need more options. Cheaper and more options. Great weapons would be awesome, so would light armor. So would spawnings, with options to make them stubborn, increased iniative or faster movement.

As they are, they are just so static.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

But consider this: if there is no fragile unit, you dont have to sacrifice skinks, capable of doing damage.

That is true, but we still have to fill up our core. So that leaves us with a Skink cloud army or Skrox. I usually play at 3000pts, so I need 750pts of core... that's a lot of skinks.

Great weapons would be awesome, so would light armor.

Saurus would be so powerful with great weapons. S6 would be highly effective and other than not being able to use our shield in combat, there would be little downside since ASL is not a big deal on initiative 1.

 

[pendrake]

I think Saurus just need more options

How about a near WYSIWYG option of spikey tortoise shell shields?

3 attacks: Chomp, HWeap, Shieldbash

Here is a really radical idea: unit has hand weapons, spiked shields and spears and a mixed weapons special ability. Meaning front rank can do 3 attacks as above while the supporting ranks use spears. When a Saurus moves up to front rank to replace a casualty he is assumed to ditch his spear.

 

[Putzfrau]

Saurus would be so powerful with great weapons. S6 would be highly effective and other than not being able to use our shield in combat, there would be little downside since ASL is not a big deal on initiative 1.

I agree, but there are certainly ways you could make it realistic with point costs. I mean saurus really need A LOT to even be remotely competitive. A lot of their problem comes from the fact that the lizardmen army simply doesnt need them in really any capacity. Look at dark elves for example. They have some really good troop choices, but the best lists avoid them entirely because they don't need them. Lizardmen are largely the same way.

It would be cool if there was a combat troop thats actually worth taking. Thats so good you could actually force a change into competitive lizardmen lists.

 

[n810]

How about a near WYSIWYG option of spikey tortoise shell shields?

Oh a whole unit with our old Maiming shields would be great.
(it's just a shield that adds +1 attack)

 

[Putzfrau]

Oh a whole unit with our old Maiming shields would be great.
(it's just a shield that adds +1 attack)

I always thought having some benefit to such ferocious looking shields would be really cool. Very appropriate too, given the theme and fluff of the saurus.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

It would be cool if there was a combat troop thats actually worth taking. Thats so good you could actually force a change into competitive lizardmen lists.

That would make for a refreshing change. The issue with infantry will always remain, no matter how good they are, they are always at the mercy of movement 4. If they are great in combat, opponents will avoid them. Still, I'm sure there are players who make great use of Saurus even as they currently are.

What we suffer from is a lack of core options.