What's the Benefit to Living Models?

[Rapier]

Isn't the entire point of every undead faction (in any game) to be that - the dead soldiers are just better - this is just a logical extension of any other army. Since we can do it; why are you not doing it? If we both had dead solider's you guys would have a better chance.

If undead wasn't inherently better in some way - they'd have no argument and you wouldn't get undead factions. No one's going to buy the logic "Hey I killed all my guys and then spent years turning them into the walking dead - now they suck more and gained nothing from it! Yeah, I'm an evil genius!"

One assumes that it's factored into the costs of units that get it - and that would go along with the fluff logic of them being an investment (You need to get well trained warriors - then kill them, and magically reanimate them to get well trained dead warriors)

[razcalking]

I can't think of any other ability you listed that's proof against so much stuff per book. I suppose you could compare Tough, but that's more an ability intentionally designed to perform equally well against nearly everything that doesn't specifically ignore it. Undead seem to often hijack abilities where well, it obviously wouldn't work on warjacks, but the reason it wouldn't work on undead is less clear cut.

Eyeless Sight seems to do just about as well. Every model that comes out with some sort of cloud effect, ability to create/move in forests, concealment or stealth makes Eyeless Sight just that much more useful.

[MathPasta]

Double post

[MathPasta]

And undead does not "get better every expansion". Does stealth get better every time a new ranged unit is added to the game? Does disruption get better every time a new 'jack is added to the game?

Yes. If at first (Theoretically) stealth only effected one gun in the game, but over 30 years it now effects 99% of the guns in the game it grows in power. But its BALANCED by things that ignore it (That have their own internal problems) like sprays and AOS.

More and more effects, spells and abilities that only target the living. Even if it doesn't make sense. Mountain king- works worse against Undeads, is an example. It doesn't have that much stuff that effects undeads. With every release there is a misbalance of effects that dismiss undead VS effected by undead.

Also some undeads have stealth. Banes do.

I see very little of undead factoring into the cost.

[Sheer_Falacy]

Yes. If at first (Theoretically) stealth only effected one gun in the game, but over 30 years it now effects 99% of the guns in the game it grows in power. But its BALANCED by things that ignore it (That have their own internal problems) like sprays and AOS.

More and more effects, spells and abilities that only target the living. Even if it doesn't make sense. Mountain king- works worse against Undeads, is an example. It doesn't have that much stuff that effects undeads. With every release there is a misbalance of effects that dismiss undead VS effected by undead.

Also some undeads have stealth. Banes do.

I see very little of undead factoring into the cost.

Undead is balanced by the things that ignore it. Specifically, every ability that doesn't require living.

As I mentioned before, I feel that PP shouldn't include so many abilities that only work on living. I play on Cryx, I get the most out of anyone, and it can be very annoying depending on the enemy army. But the perspective that it gets stronger every release is silly. If a new release had no models that cared about living, undead would actually get weaker. If you want undead to keep the same balance it currently has, each release should have the same percentage of stuff that cares about living as exists before that release.

And including morale stuff in the list of things undead works against is silly, because tons of models are fearless. I mean, why can't they stop buffing Skorne, and their trivial armywide fearlessness? Or all those units with cmd 10 and rerolls?

[PG_Devilsquid]

There is no benefit to being a living model. That's why it's not listed under the 'Advantages' section.

[PG_RevGeoff]

The living get flowing locks of hair (unless you are a bald elf). The undead get a bleached skull with a crack or two in it.

[Rogue Sun]

I don't necessarily think there should be an advantage to living, but I DO feel like there should be a disadvantage to undead to help balance all of the perks. It wouldn't have to be huge, but something like fire only going out on a die roll of 1, or fire attacks getting an additional damage die against them. Yes, Menoth would own undead models, but really we should expect that from the big faith based faction.

[wazatdingder]

Would a Victorias Secret show be half a good with dead models? Other than eDenny that is...

[WarpedWolf]

Would a Victorias Secret show be half a good with dead models? Other than eDenny that is...

I now need brain bleach. Thank you.

[Vex]

I don't necessarily think there should be an advantage to living, but I DO feel like there should be a disadvantage to undead to help balance all of the perks.

Right, just like Fearless, Stealth, Tough, etc. should have disadvantages.... What, what?

Besides, Undead is one of the very few advantages that already has down sides, such as being vulnerable to Dominate Undead.

[Legrasse]

In Circle, being a living model means you can benefit from Soothing Song, Pack Hunters, Alpha, Forced Evolution, Wild Aggression, Regrowth, Primal, Virility, and Medicate. It also means I can Sands of Fate them, murder them for souls, and kill them to sprout forests, but the last three are more a benefit for me than for the model itself.

[King-of-Storms]

The living can make babehs!

And the living look better in high heels...

[kazetenshu]

How about this:
Undead now have souls, and generate souls. They are no longer fearless. Abilities that would allow you to charge living models, now allow you to charge undead models. Spells and abilities that would be used on living models, can now be used on undead. What do we have now? Regular units, with stat lines that, for the most part, are lower than other units.

Theres a lot of hate over cryx and undead. I play mercs, and my issue isn't that they are undead, its that they keep coming back. So what if they are fearless, THEY ARE DEAD, whats there to fear? Got some bloodthirsty gators that are useless against banethralls? DERP! No blood, and no one likes rotten jerky. You say living models fuel cryx's abilities? Well yea, where else do they get their undead. Fact is, cryx are crippled a bit when theres no way to cull souls and collect corpse tokens. If you are arguing over a balance standpoint, then balance the **** out of Ebutcher, or the bull**** eyeless sight nonsense.

As for benefits of living models, good news, they are alive, as i'm sure you would be in those times. From the game standpoint, you aren't just fodder, and stat-lines and abilities normally keep them above undead.

Undead is working as intended, or it would have never made it to mark2. It exists as a fun ability and to fallow along with the setting that the game exists in. Personally, cryx are fine for me, as with all the armies (cept for that **** all stormwall). They all have something that gives them a big advantage, like legion and eyeless sight, or circle and their ability to give damn near everything pathfinder, and khador being a walking mountain.

tl;dr-You can either QQ or enjoy the game, i'll be at the table rolling snake eyes all day having a good time, where will you be?

[Blaque]

I kind of agree with what's already been said: Undead is an Advantage. It shouldn't be double-edged (only Abomination really is of them as far as I can tell), and there are abilities all over that "get better" as new things come out. Eyeless Sight is better as more Stealth come sout. Stealth is better as more ranged comes out. Pathfinder is better as more terrain-generation come sout. Folks cite Domination, but Colossals, for instnace, I feel was more a buff for Stealth (lotsa guns) and Pathfinder (giant-*** wreck marckers) than it was Undead (Meat-Fueled).

As an aside, I also think the Undead hate often is a very Cryx-biased thing and volume-biased thing. Constructs, as an aside, tend to actually be basically the same as Undead, but not affected by stuff that calls-out Undead. This normally equals non-living, but there are things where currently things that call-out non-Living affect all of both, but htere are things that don't affect Constructs. PP has been a bit less generous with this on non-warjacks (which balances that I guess) outside of Circle Orboros, but something I find interesting.

Really, to me, "I hate Undead" is another veiled "I hate Cryx" as I see it argued adn presented. And attepts to try and change it based on the latter before thinking of what outside of it is really involved in the former seems odd to me.

And stuff.

[Dragon2439]

We Cryx hate fighting undead as much as you do.

[x3tsniper]

How about this:
Undead now have souls, and generate souls. They are no longer fearless. Abilities that would allow you to charge living models, now allow you to charge undead models. Spells and abilities that would be used on living models, can now be used on undead. What do we have now? Regular units, with stat lines that, for the most part, are lower than other units.

Theres a lot of hate over cryx and undead. I play mercs, and my issue isn't that they are undead, its that they keep coming back. So what if they are fearless, THEY ARE DEAD, whats there to fear? Got some bloodthirsty gators that are useless against banethralls? DERP! No blood, and no one likes rotten jerky. You say living models fuel cryx's abilities? Well yea, where else do they get their undead. Fact is, cryx are crippled a bit when theres no way to cull souls and collect corpse tokens. If you are arguing over a balance standpoint, then balance the **** out of Ebutcher, or the bull**** eyeless sight nonsense.

As for benefits of living models, good news, they are alive, as i'm sure you would be in those times. From the game standpoint, you aren't just fodder, and stat-lines and abilities normally keep them above undead.

Undead is working as intended, or it would have never made it to mark2. It exists as a fun ability and to fallow along with the setting that the game exists in. Personally, cryx are fine for me, as with all the armies (cept for that **** all stormwall). They all have something that gives them a big advantage, like legion and eyeless sight, or circle and their ability to give damn near everything pathfinder, and khador being a walking mountain.

tl;dr-You can either QQ or enjoy the game, i'll be at the table rolling snake eyes all day having a good time, where will you be?

I am sensing some missconceptions about khador in this post.

[lordofnecropolis]

The perk to being a living model: having your own thoughts, hopes, dreams and emotions.

Unless you meant in game... In which case... What else is the reclaimer gonna turn into warjack food?

[Lich_Lord_X]

On a similar note what's the benefit to having a soul?

This is a ridiculous thread btw.

[SjoerdH]

Whats the benefit of not having reach?
Whats the benefit of not having stealth?

Sure, there are situations thinkable in which it is better to not have those abilities but in general they are meant as an advantage. Models without reach will cost less points or be better at other things. Same as with undead.

If you think undead get all the perks you shouldn't be crying, you should be buying a Cryx army.

[Sheer_Falacy]

Whats the benefit of not having reach?
Whats the benefit of not having stealth?

Those advantages do, in fact, have actual (if non-obvious) downsides.

If you don't have reach, modes you engage can't move nearly as far without taking a free strike.

If you don't have stealth, you block LOS from models more than 5 inches from you.

Situational downsides, rather like Dominate Undead and Erosion.

[Alexwheeler]

lol this thread reminds me of when i was just starting. walked into my LGS to meet a friend that was going to help me pick out an army to start with. after just looking at some of the models i had narrowed it down to two factions. now at this time it was during the transfer from MKI to MKII, anyone remember having to print out your "cards"!?

the factions that i was now looking at were Ret and Legion. i liked both b/c of the color schemes and the idea of playing Elfs again (old High Elf player). i then asked what the play styles of the two factions were, my friend asked me "well do you like playing by the rules or cheating?" i kind of LoL'ed to myself. he went on to tell me the perks to legion and why he hated to play against them. needless to say i picked legion

[pavel0]

On a similar note what's the benefit to having a soul?

This is a ridiculous thread btw.

OP asked a totally legitimate question, IMHO. I think the perks have been covered by those who like to be helpful.

In a nutshell: living models are good fuel for certain models. Also certain spells/animi abilities can only affect living models.

[Blaque]

Those advantages do, in fact, have actual (if non-obvious) downsides.

If you don't have reach, modes you engage can't move nearly as far without taking a free strike.

If you don't have stealth, you block LOS from models more than 5 inches from you.

Situational downsides, rather like Dominate Undead and Erosion.

More or less. And even then, some icons are meant to be fully advantageous. Nothing is ever bad of having an Elemental Imunity, for instance. Pathfinder 9/10 times is going to always be better for you than not having it. Fearless, Commander, AD, and so on are all meant to be advantageous. And some factions have it, thematically, to have one of those all over their force (namely, Circle and Pathfinder, Trollbloods and Tough, Cryx and Undead).

And stuff.

[Rogue Sun]

Right, just like Fearless, Stealth, Tough, etc. should have disadvantages.... What, what?

Besides, Undead is one of the very few advantages that already has down sides, such as being vulnerable to Dominate Undead.

ONE model's ability a disadvantage does NOT make.

The inherent problem with undead is that there are no downsides in any form. You don't even pay extra points for the advantage. If Bane Thralls and McThralls were actually somewhat expensive to field, fine, you're paying the points for all of your benefits, but they're some of the cheapest infantry in the game for what they do.

[Crate123]

ONE model's ability a disadvantage does NOT make.

The inherent problem with undead is that there are no downsides in any form. You don't even pay extra points for the advantage. If Bane Thralls and McThralls were actually somewhat expensive to field, fine, you're paying the points for all of your benefits, but they're some of the cheapest infantry in the game for what they do.

The argument might be made for Bane Thralls (although I dont think so), but there is no doubt that Mcthralls should never ever be expensive in any way or shape whatsoever.
Undead is a 98% advantage and thats all there is to it. The advantage of being living is that you probably do not serve Toruk, yet.
Oh and there are more than 1 model with dominate undead and there is a rule called Erosion that does not affect living models.

[solkan]

ONE model's ability a disadvantage does NOT make.

The inherent problem with undead is that there are no downsides in any form.

It appears that the inherent problem is that you think undead is supposed to be a disadvantage, when in contrast it's listed with all of the other advantages.

Your living model is on fire without being subject to huge penalties or random movement? What's up with that?!?

[Blaque]

ONE model's ability a disadvantage does NOT make.

The inherent problem with undead is that there are no downsides in any form. You don't even pay extra points for the advantage. If Bane Thralls and McThralls were actually somewhat expensive to field, fine, you're paying the points for all of your benefits, but they're some of the cheapest infantry in the game for what they do.

To which I ask, why should undead be such when Pathfinder (Circle), Tough (Trollbloods), Fearless (Protectorate), or Eyeless Sight (Legion) isn't subject to the same scrutiny? Is it because of Undead itself or the models they are on? And there is still argument these models do pay in places. Circle tends to pay in hitting power, Trollblood and Protectorate in defensive stats, Legion in point cost, and Undead do tend towards lower CMD stats and MATs.

Why should Undead have an disadvantage, while the other icons don't? And it isn't even the best, as Construct is Undead without Undead-specific hate.

And stuff.

[Vex]

ONE model's ability a disadvantage does NOT make.

It is an advantage. Most advantages have no downsides at all. And, in point of fact, one disadvantage is still a disadvantage.

The inherent problem with undead is that there are no downsides in any form.

The inherent problem with your argument is that most advantages have no disadvantages. That's why that are called advantages.

[Althrion]

I think a problem is, that most advantages help only in one area.
Just look at stealth and tough. They help against shooting or against dying.

Undead on the other side does grant you fearless and you dont produce soultokens. Fair enough. Also that some spells require living seems ok, because there are also some spells that require undead and it makes sense.
The major problem here is, that undead also get access to benefits that make no sense AND give them a advantage they dont need.
As a example: Killshot from the Mountainking. If he kills undead, he doesnt get his killshot. Why this huge guys makes e difference from kicking Banes around from kicking living dudes around ist a big question for most players. Especially why it requires living to trigger the ability. There is a advantage for undead that doesn´t make sense and gives them an additional advantage over the fearless and no soultokens advantage. So they get from release to release which includes "only living" abilities that would make sense on undeads and additional advantage and grow stronger.

[Crate123]

I think a problem is, that most advantages help only in one area.
Just look at stealth and tough. They help against shooting or against dying.

Undead on the other side does grant you fearless and you dont produce soultokens. Fair enough. Also that some spells require living seems ok, because there are also some spells that require undead and it makes sense.
The major problem here is, that undead also get access to benefits that make no sense AND give them a advantage they dont need.
As a example: Killshot from the Mountainking. If he kills undead, he doesnt get his killshot. Why this huge guys makes e difference from kicking Banes around from kicking living dudes around ist a big question for most players. Especially why it requires living to trigger the ability. There is a advantage for undead that doesn´t make sense and gives them an additional advantage over the fearless and no soultokens advantage. So they get from release to release which includes "only living" abilities that would make sense on undeads and additional advantage and grow stronger.

Remember that all this stuff, constructs get as well. A lot of living only rules make no sense, kill shot is definately one of those.

[Sardonic Artery]

Yeah, I think that's it: Undead is an advantage, but I don't fully think of it as such (compared to other abilities). It feels more like an ability that gets out of more stuff than it should, whereas being living has very little perks -- save avoiding dominate undead.

[GreenJello]

Yeah, I think that's it: Undead is an advantage, but I don't fully think of it as such (compared to other abilities). It feels more like an ability that gets out of more stuff than it should, whereas being living has very little perks -- save avoiding dominate undead.

Well, how could you fix it in such a way that wasn't a pain? Dominate Undead is more a fluffy ability than any real attempt to screw over undead models. Seems like most things that could be put in to make it a disadvantage would be way too targeted to be easily balanced: useless unless facing Cryx, OMGWTFBBQ broken against them.

[Synikal]

I see it like this, undead doesn't really have any extra benefits other than its listed fearlessness and no soul generation. The real issue is with the spell or ability itself not affecting non-living targets. Abilities not affecting non-living isn't the fault of the non-living advantage. Also living is the unmodified base line and undead is an advantage added on.

[jandrese]

I don't know, it wouldn't be totally out of line to have a few models/units/solos sprinkled throughout the game with undead specific abilities. Maybe Precursor Knights get +2 SPD and Pathfinder when charging undead? Maybe a Protectorate caster gets a second attack spell that is "turn undead", maybe a Ashes to Ashes type spell that only costs 3 and is POW 12 but only works against Undead Models? Khador could get a solo that has a few spell options and one of which is "Necromatic interference", where an undead non-warcaster warlock model hit by the spell forfeits movement or action next turn.

There are plenty of abilities in the game that only work on living, why not toss in a few more that only work on undead?

[Vex]

There are plenty of abilities in the game that only work on living, why not toss in a few more that only work on undead?

Really, what the game needs is fewer abilities that are randomly either amazing or useless, depending on your opponent's army, not more. Every time a new model comes out with a "living model only" rule, I just cringe. It screws up balance, and isn't good for the game.

Gators are an excellent example of this. There are so many models in Gators with "living model only" rules, that the entire faction is at a severe disadvantage when facing Cryx. The faction is balanced around their abilities working, and against undead half of them just don't.

However, this is not a problem with the Undead advantage. This is a problem with all of the other abilities in the game that randomly have "living models only" as a requirement. IMO, PP should just replace every occurrence of "living model only" with "warrior model only". It would fix a lot of problems, IMO.

[Scottl1]

I don't know, it wouldn't be totally out of line to have a few models/units/solos sprinkled throughout the game with undead specific abilities. Maybe Precursor Knights get +2 SPD and Pathfinder when charging undead? Maybe a Protectorate caster gets a second attack spell that is "turn undead", maybe a Ashes to Ashes type spell that only costs 3 and is POW 12 but only works against Undead Models? Khador could get a solo that has a few spell options and one of which is "Necromatic interference", where an undead non-warcaster warlock model hit by the spell forfeits movement or action next turn.

There are plenty of abilities in the game that only work on living, why not toss in a few more that only work on undead?

SO make abilities that target just Cryx and a few gators? lol sweet yea that sounds great! lol Wouldn't make them played anymore though so kinda a wasted effort. Constructs are still laughing at you though. Don't see many weakness for wold stalkers. The only model they don't like is a slag since he's one of the only models that I can think of off the top my head that targets constructs. lol

[Crate123]

SO make abilities that target just Cryx and a few gators? lol sweet yea that sounds great! lol Wouldn't make them played anymore though so kinda a wasted effort. Constructs are still laughing at you though. Don't see many weakness for wold stalkers. The only model they don't like is a slag since he's one of the only models that I can think of off the top my head that targets constructs. lol

Yeah its pretty weird that people whine about undead but constructs are all fine and dandy.

[jandrese]

SO make abilities that target just Cryx and a few gators? lol sweet yea that sounds great! lol Wouldn't make them played anymore though so kinda a wasted effort. Constructs are still laughing at you though. Don't see many weakness for wold stalkers. The only model they don't like is a slag since he's one of the only models that I can think of off the top my head that targets constructs. lol

Sure, if one spell out of three on a solo targets undead specifically, what's the problem? If one unit gets a slight buff against zombies, well great. Happens all the time against living models. One spell out of 5 or 6 on a Warcaster's card isn't going to make or break the caster either.

I don't think it's so bad that there are living and undead only spells in the game. It add some flavor, although as Vex points out it does become a problem when you have too many of them in a single faction.

[Scottl1]

Sure, if one spell out of three on a solo targets undead specifically, what's the problem? If one unit gets a slight buff against zombies, well great. Happens all the time against living models. One spell out of 5 or 6 on a Warcaster's card isn't going to make or break the caster either.

I don't think it's so bad that there are living and undead only spells in the game. It add some flavor, although as Vex points out it does become a problem when you have too many of them in a single faction.

So since gators and living models get bonus vs living should humans get anti beast and anti non human as well? I mean it's only fair. Adds flavor? Uh sure but mostly you want anti cryx tech. lol If you look at cryx the only charge living model etc bonus belongs to LIVING bloodgorgers. lol Oh I guess you could say that one spell of morty too but th point is most you're killing living better is LIVING. lol