Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=9644		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Xisor [ Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir
In the proper (non-Epic) background it is made fairly clear that fleets with only a handful of Tombships are/could just be just scraping the surface of Necron power. Is it not somewhat...out of synchronisation...to posit that the Aeonic Orb is the epitome of Necron power?

I mean, Abbatoirs, they aren't massive beyond belief. Not with only 6HPs. A tombship, is already fairly massive. Yet we hear a story (albeit *just* a story at this stage) of a Necron vessel that dwarfs an Ork Space Hulk...

It's a difficult one, but I think my point is just that the wording and background for these seems a bit...wrong. Not insidiously wrong, just...sensationalist and almost factually incorrect. The fluff for them seems appropriate in principle:

Extremely devastating weapon: check
World harvester: check
Massive supporting battle unit: check

As said: A difficult one to relate properly. Does anyone understand what I'm saying? You don't need to agree...! ?:confuse:
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir
I understand, and you're right, the background could perhaps do with a slight nudge here.
Author:  Moscovian [ Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir

(Xisor @ Jun. 10 2007,17:16)
QUOTE
In the proper (non-Epic) background it is made fairly clear that fleets with only a handful of Tombships are/could just be just scraping the surface of Necron power. Is it not somewhat...out of synchronisation...to posit that the Aeonic Orb is the epitome of Necron power?

I mean, Abbatoirs, they aren't massive beyond belief. Not with only 6HPs. A tombship, is already fairly massive. Yet we hear a story (albeit *just* a story at this stage) of a Necron vessel that dwarfs an Ork Space Hulk...

It's a difficult one, but I think my point is just that the wording and background for these seems a bit...wrong. Not insidiously wrong, just...sensationalist and almost factually incorrect. The fluff for them seems appropriate in principle:

Extremely devastating weapon: check
World harvester: check
Massive supporting battle unit: check

As said: A difficult one to relate properly. Does anyone understand what I'm saying? You don't need to agree...! ?:confuse:

Created long ago as an expression of ultimate power, the ?onic Orb is the epitome of
Necron technology and a testament to the might of the C?tan.

It isn't necessarily the epitome of Necron power, just Necron technology.  I don't think there is anything wrong with saying that the trapping of a star fragment is the top technology the Necron have.  That seems like a difficult thing to do to me. :;):

As for the Damage capacity, I was thinking about this while reviewing the Dark Eldar list (insert throat clearing here as I wink at Frank).  Damage capacity is not necessarily a reflection of size.  The Tau Manta is a DC6, yet the thing dwarfs the Warlord Titan (DC8).   Our own Executor only has a DC6, yet we described it as bigger than the Manta.

Damage capacity is just that - how much damage it can take before it is incapacitated / destroyed.
Author:  Dwarf Supreme [ Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:51 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir

(Moscovian @ Jun. 12 2007,11:46)
QUOTE
Damage capacity is just that - how much damage it can take before it is incapacitated / destroyed.

I agree with that. I can think of things in real life that are large, but flimsy that wouldn't warrant a high DC. On the other hand, I can think of things that are relatively small, but would have a high DC due to solid construction.
Author:  nealhunt [ Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir
wording and background for these seems a bit...wrong. Not insidiously wrong, just...sensationalist and almost factually incorrect
Wouldn't that fit exactly with all the other GW background text?  :devil:
Author:  Dwarf Supreme [ Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir

(nealhunt @ Jun. 12 2007,11:56)
QUOTE
wording and background for these seems a bit...wrong. Not insidiously wrong, just...sensationalist and almost factually incorrect

Wouldn't that fit exactly with all the other GW background text? ?:devil:
:D  :D  :D
Author:  dptdexys [ Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir
As for the Damage capacity, I was thinking about this while reviewing the Dark Eldar list (insert throat clearing here as I wink at Frank). ?Damage capacity is not necessarily a reflection of size. ?The Tau Manta is a DC6, yet the thing dwarfs the Warlord Titan (DC8). ? Our own Executor only has a DC6, yet we described it as bigger than the Manta.

Isn't the Manta DC 8 (seems we've had this manta DC discussion before)
Author:  Xisor [ Tue Jun 12, 2007 6:11 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir

(nealhunt @ Jun. 12 2007,16:56)
QUOTE
wording and background for these seems a bit...wrong. Not insidiously wrong, just...sensationalist and almost factually incorrect

Wouldn't that fit exactly with all the other GW background text? ?:devil:
Oh my!  :p

Regarding what Moscovian says: Fair enough on the epitome of technology bit, but if I can misinterpret that, loads of other folks can too!

Regarding DC, again this is quite fair, size =! damage capacity. But I still think it is a pertinent point with respect to the Abbatoir. Necron things that are huge have to be resilient, they have alot of enemies dontcha know? There may well be supermassive Abbatoirs for chomping planetary populations, but perhaps it'd be fairer to asser that these Abbatoirs are the ones they send against individual population centres. E.g. as the 'edge strimmers' of the population, not the fully blown that can between a handful of them totally devestate even an Eldar or Ork world...(back in the day)
Author:  Moscovian [ Tue Jun 12, 2007 6:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir
Yes, it is DC8.  My mistake. :blush: But the example still holds - that thing is really big, yet it is the same DC as a Warlord.
Author:  corey3750 [ Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir
a couple of things to remember about Fluff.

1.) It almost always described from the Imperium's point of view, and if anyone has every mastered the art of out of synch, inconsistance, factually inaccurate, sensetionalizm then it's Mankind.

2.)  It's an Expression of Ultimate power.  I mean sure, a big ship is impressive as hell, especially the Nightbringer itself... but anyone can build a big ship... how many people can trap a star?
Author:  Xisor [ Tue Jun 19, 2007 10:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir
Necron Dyson Sphere  :;):

My point with the Harvester:
- It's described as really rather impressive
- It's not *that* impressive
- It's the kind of thing that, presumably, had to deal with Ork Gargants when the Orks weren't a rabble, when they weren't just cobbled together and when the Orks were, presumably, an insanely professional army

The description doesn't need to be so...ultimate.

Similarly with the Aeonic Orb, as magnificent an icon of ultimate technology as it is...it's not really terribly impressive for all that it is.

Not to mention that Necron stuff has always been almost unequivocably better than everyone elses'. The best of theirs doesn't seem to be too much better, yet the Old Ones had Blackstone Fortresses...

I still think it could be written in a more...sensible manner?
Author:  ragnarok [ Tue Jun 19, 2007 10:50 pm ]
Post subject:  Fluff re: Warbarque, Aeonic Orb and Abbatoir
I wouldn't say that the abbatior was designed to go up against armies (back in the old days), rather it was used to make the culling of the defeated servants of the old ones easier.

The star in a jar on the other hand was a match for other WEs back in the older versions of the list.  However it was downsized for playability.  They probably also need their stellar remnants to be replaced. 65 million years would of depleted the power they once held.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/