No Special Characters

[dvdhwk]

So a local tournament has a restriction: No special characters.

Someone asked what the deal was... his answer:
"No specials is a pretty standard comp for most US Fantasy tournaments. The idea is that there are a number of characters out there (i.e. Teclis) that are just too over-the-top."

I'm new to this city and gamin community, but my experience has been the opposite.

Do you think its really the case that more than 50% of US fantasy tournaments don't allow special characters.

[Chronowraith]

That used to be pretty standard as of even a couple of years ago. This was largely due to the slotted army building concept. You could have a 2500 point tournament and still take characters like Malekith. With percentages that isn't the case anymore. Most of the broken characters are unusable at even normal point levels. Also, with the rise of unit upgrade characters it really hurts when tournaments ban specials anymore.

That being said... it is still up to tournament organizers to decide on the houserules. While I think their reasoning for not using specials is absurd and akin to, "JoBob did it so we are doing it to".

[gcsmith]

So a local tournament has a restriction: No special characters.

Someone asked what the deal was... his answer:
"No specials is a pretty standard comp for most US Fantasy tournaments. The idea is that there are a number of characters out there (i.e. Teclis) that are just too over-the-top."

I'm new to this city and gamin community, but my experience has been the opposite. Do you think its really the case that more than 50% of US fantasy tournaments don't allow special characters.

Teclis is hardly over powered, most people think that any role of double is instant, not so, its any double which successifully casts, which with the amount of dice u need to roll will often be Double 6, sure he can ignore 1 per turn but there are ways to counter it. Secondly with how quick you can get into combat and focus him, any skilled player can get him down quickly.

[Chronowraith]

Agreed. Teclis, while extremely powerful at times, is easily handled. Feedback scroll is a particularly good way of ending him since people are unafraid of using 5 or 6 dice with him.

[eldargal]

I never take SCS outside large, special themed games. I tend to think SCs with unit wide abilities actually stunt players tactical growth. But not including them in tournaments has always struck me as one of those silly concessions to friendly play which don't really belong. I loathe the competitive mindset when it starts intruding into the mainstream, but likewise I don't see why no SCs and comp scores and things like that should be included in a purely competitive environment.

[muse1c]

I always think it's a shame when SC are banned, but I suppose the pros outweigh the cons, from an organisational side.
The fact that someone is unable to take Teclis, for example, outweighs the fact that a Nurgle WoC warband cannot be led by Festus.

That being said, I think it is a shame that even the minor SC are always banned, for example those under 200pts, as it definitely does hinder the possibility of themed armies

Cheers

[dvdhwk]

While I appreciate the discussion as to the merits/drawbacks of not allowing special characters... no one has addressed the question I posed yet:

Do you think its really the case that more than 50% of US fantasy tournaments don't allow special characters.

[Chronowraith]

Actually, if you bothered to read my first post I did respond to this point.


That used to be pretty standard as of even a couple of years ago. This was largely due to the slotted army building concept. You could have a 2500 point tournament and still take characters like Malekith. With percentages that isn't the case anymore

To spell it out more plainly, no, it is not standard to disallow special characters anymore. This used to be common in 7th edition but since 8th edition hit the majority of tournaments (here in the states) at the local and national level allow special characters.

[dvdhwk]

@Chronowraith - I did read your post, thanks. Your post was unclear.

First you stated that banning SC was pretty standard several years ago. Cool.

You then stated that back then, you could take special characters, due to the "slotted army building concept."

You then stated:
With percentages that isn't the case anymore

The antecedent of "that" was unclear, but given typical usage and construction, it would seem "that" was referring to the feasability of taking special characters (not whether or not they're allowed in tournaments now), being the nearest concept that could logically serve as the antecedent.

Your point seemed to be that it was unnecessary to ban special characters, since 8th ed list building theory doesn't really allow for their economical use.

So, no, I did not think that my question was addressed. Your most recent post clearly does address the question. Thanks.

Not trying to be snarky... (but I'm probably succeeding nonetheless).

[Chronowraith]

I'm perfectly willing to admit my first post was likely vague. That's why I reposted :)

I don't offend easily on the internet. So no worries.

[Kaiserdean]

Personally, I don't like special characters and I like "small-ball" play style but I find that about 50% of tourneys allow special or named characters.

Teclis is powerful and often cited as the reason SCs aren't allowed, but there isn't an apples-to-apples SCs. For a long time, Archaon and Teclis armies marched their way to the top placements at most tournaments while Ska the Falconer looked on in envy.

[L192837465]

I have actually never seen a tournament where special characters are not allowed. The most restricting one I've seen is "One character only, tournament wide", which boiled down to if you submitted a list with say, Teclis in it, you could use him. But no one else in the tournament could. Pretty ingenious, and I thought it was cool. But really, with the percentages change, they're OK, but I still wouldn't object to a tournament that banned only lord level special characters. I find it silly that all characters are banned for being overpowered when you can't even take a Chaos Lord on a dragon, which dies horribly to sniper cannons before it can do anything.



oh well. There's my thoughts, anyways.

[cerebros]

I'm not in the US so obviously can't answer the OP's question but here in the UK Special Characters are a rarity in being allowed (although in the past few months some tournaments have started letting them be used).

Personally I started playing Warhammer back in the days when you needed your opponent's permission to use special characters and frankly there are still some that enable boring to play against or overpowered options (witness Bryan Carmichael's Throne of Skulls winning Tomb Kings Khalida list). I don't think the game misses anything by them not being used.

[Nightstalker]

since i dont live in USA i cant say anything about that, but as far as i know all tournaments in Germany do not allow special characters (maybe except the official gw tournaments). I dont mind that. i rarely play with a special character, since those mostly were overpowered. one of my opponents usually plays with Grimgork Ironhide, but so far i always got him down (was pretty much fun with the old slaanesh lore and that spell which lets a character hit his own unit).

[alshrive]

personally i like special characters and haven't had an issue using them to date. it is my opinion that they are written into the Army Lists and i have to say nowadays are a lot more balanced. I find them very characterful (pun intended) and actually quite often theme my armies around them. i know in tournament play that themed armies don't tend to work but i actually think the idea of banning them is personally a bit silly. it is the equivalent of deciding not to use a certain section of the rulebook simply because you feel it unfair. I like to view the rules as my constraints, not being arbitrarily told what i can and cannot take.

ALShrive