If you break whilst thirsting you rally on a 6.

Yep, psychotic madmen who also become broken are not likely to pay attention to your demands that they reform their battle line... they've succombed to the Black Rage.

A canny opponent would do well to try and break Thirsting formations for this reason.


I will probably put a little token next to any formation that begins Thirsting, and take it away next time they pass an Activation Test.

Seems simple enough, no different to marking a formation that has become broken.


Yes, because that is passing an order other than Engage.

It is intended to represent them exerting their training and focusing on calming their rage, pushing it deep down inside them and bottling it up in a nice healthy manner.


Hold, as standard.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

2+ initiative with +2 to engage does exactly the same thing without a needlessly overcomplicated rule.

No, it does not represent their loss of cohesion (increased difficulty paying attention to order test or rallying) when Thirsting.
Nor does it represent how the Death Company are crazier than the rest of the army.

All it does is makes them unreliable. Like I said, I'd rather remove the rule entirely than have such a badly-fitting version included.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

1/6 of the time in 40k they don't do what you want for the equivilent of an epic turn, and instead turn on each other, charge rashly into combat etc. With the proposal Chroma and I suggest this is exactly what will happen.

It absolutely represents loss of cohesion, as they pick up a BM from failing, meaning they are more likely to fail again the next turn. It even contains your idea of them calming down to remove the thirst, as they can chose to regroup as part of their hold action.

The turning on each other etc is represented by the BM taken when failing the activation, which they will do more often. The +2 to engage is there because thirst or no thirst they're going to be able to charge like nutters.

Death company could be initiative 3+ with +3 to engage if you really insist on them being different.

There's just no need for a complicated, overwrought special rule to represent a minor 40k level concern.

Your version will never rage out at all unless they have BMs or are retaining. Does that represent the background well?

Yes, the Thirst comes upon them most strongly at moments of crisis.

Not so much when they're just hanging about in your backfield trying to go on Overwatch.


=====

2+ Inititaive gives you an army that is unreliable, all the time.

Unreliable at passing all order tests, and unreliable at taking all rally tests.

"Red Thirst" gives you an army that is reliable, but when you fail an activation test that one formation alone becomes (very) unreliable for 1 turn, before the Thirst (hopefully) subsides and they become reliable again.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Never at all under other circumstances? I don't buy it.

My version will still be more likely to go nuts under pressure, but will also have a chance to do so normally.

Zombo: Ninja'd you.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

The Blood Angels ARE unreliable. In 40k, 1/6 of your untis will be raving lunatics you can barely control. That's unreliable.

Frankly Red Thirst is a 40k level concern, and if it is represented at all in epic it should be in an abstracted way, much like ork animosity etc.

You don't even seem open to even considering other options. There are plenty of simpler ways it could be represented than what you propose. Off the top of my head, another choice could be taking 2 BM when failing an activation rather than one.

Actually 1/6th of your force just become "Really Awesome Marines".

You still retain full control over them, because 40k doesn't reflect the background properly (Ie: You'll never have Devastators drop their weapons and charge the enemy in 40k like they do in the background).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Also, 2+ initiative would mean Whirlwinds, Predators, basically any non-Engagement formation, would just suck.

You'd also need hefty points drops for basically everything.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Nor will you with your system. You'll have Devestators fail an activation then marshall the next turn.

Or something like a 5cm speed boost

Or as I've also suggested, something other than initiative 2+ that doesn't require a flowchart, such as an extra BM when failing an activation.

Your suggestion is an equally big nerf anyway, as it basically means they'll do nothing for at least two turns if they fail an activation.

You'll still have a bit of control over them yes, you'll be able to choose whether to Engage or Marshal while they're thirsting (or risk trying another order type on a 4+)... but that's at least partially because taking choice out of the player's hands completely is boring... but the point is, the Red Thirst rises and suddenly you have "less" control over that particular formation. Taking away all control doesn't work too well in Epic anyway, due to the way the turn sequence works you can often still work around such restrictions.


Not really. All else being equal an initiative 1+ army will fail activations a lot less than an initiative 2+ army.

A flat initiative rating of 2+ is a much larger nerf, which will constrain the entire style of the list (No more "Marine double-taps" due to poor basic Initiative rating making it too risky).

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

So you admit that your rule is inconsistant with the background like the 40k rule then? Neither will result in devestators running into close combat like you say they should.

Either come up with a complicated rule that perfectly represents the background or go for an abstracted epic-level view. This half-way house is just the worst of both worlds; overcomplicated and not representative.

My proposed rule is more consistent with the background than either 40k or your proposal.

Following the background 100% and losing all control over the formation would just result in a boring game, so my proposed rule still gives a tactical choice to the BA player.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter