New Team - the Dragonettes

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:47 am

I found some nice little resin cast baby dragon miniatures with stubby little wings and long tails, so I wanted to develop a new team concept that suited the figure. This team concept is built around a new trait called Wings.

0-4 Red Dragonettes: 6, 4, 2, 8 Wings Cost: 100K Skills: G, S

0-4 Snakeneck Dragonettes: 6, 3, 4, 8 Wings Cost: 90K Skills: G, A

0-12 Dragonettes (Line): 6, 3, 3, 8 Wings Cost: 60K Skills: G

Special: Wings trait allows a player to make a +1 Leap once per turn.

On a double a Dragonette may take Prehensile Tail or Razor Sharp Fangs, but if it does so its AG drops to 2. (Growing into a Dragon)

Big Guy:

0-2 Dragons: 6, 5, 2, 9 BIG_GUY, Wings, RSF, Preh. T., W.A. Cost 130K Skills: Big-Guy

Allies: High Elf, Human, Dragon

Let me know what you think.

Princelucianus · Post by **Princelucianus** » Wed Oct 03, 2001 11:36 am

I've read a post once on BBcentral where Galakscraper stated that having strength 4 and Agilty 4 players in one team would be overpowering. I still think it's a valid point. Teams should either be agile or strong.
There was a discussion on BBC http://pub10.ezboard.com/fbloodbowlcentralfrm4
about Dragonettes. I didn't follow the conversation but you might check it out....

Deathwing · Post by **Deathwing** » Wed Oct 03, 2001 6:28 pm

Princeluc, I think you'll find that the posts are by the same person. Cue heavy discussion about costing formula.

I think the dragons are either too strong or undercosted. ST5 and RSF? Nasty.
Done any playtesting yet? Be interested to hear how they're developing.

Princelucianus · Post by **Princelucianus** » Wed Oct 03, 2001 9:56 pm

That's what you get when you want to help somebody, but it's actually the same person on the other board. "Lucy in the sky, with diamonds". The next time when I'm trying to point people to their own original posts elsewhere, I'll roll a D6.

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Thu Oct 04, 2001 9:04 am

Yes, it is the same person, and the same team. I was hoping to get a broader range of responses by posting in a different group. It just shows that the BB community is much closer knit than many expect. I am Chaosslipper on BBC. And I do appreciate your help.

As far as ST4 and AG4 in the same team is concerned, I think you have a valid point. I may drop the Red Dragons to ST3 in the playtest version, with a commensurate drop in cost.

The consensus of opinion about the Dragon seems to be that it is properly costed, being roughly comparable to a Rat Ogre.

We have playtested the team in one-off games, but our current 20 week season is only half way through. Unfortunately I didn't have the team at the start of this season - well, maybe not

my High Elves are doing pretty well.

I find that unless I playtest a team in an extended league environment, the playtest results can be a little erratic. Our next season starts in January, so I am trying to get quality feedback before I commit the team to League playtesting.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Slipper on 2001-10-04 10:07 ]</font>

Deathwing · Post by **Deathwing** » Thu Oct 04, 2001 10:17 pm

Re: the Dragon being undercosted/roughly comparable to a Rat Ogre.
Both have Pre. Tail and WA; guess you can trade -1 AG for +1 AV and RSF for MB, but that leaves you wings effectively for no cost. Maybe it's because I think the RO's ability to use TRRs make them the best Big Guys out there and are slightly undercosted compared to Minos and Ogres.
Anyway, good luck with the playtesting!

Anonymous · Post by **Anonymous** » Fri Oct 05, 2001 8:10 am

Your analysis is pretty accurate, however Rat Ogres can get mutations which can change a good Big-Guy into an awesome one.

Wings, on the other hand, allows an AG2 player a 50-50 chance of leaping. I doubt that a Dragon would use the skill voluntarily all that often, and the opportunities to do so, given that the Dragon also has Wild Animal, are likely to be few and far between.