Are Warhammer 40k Epic Heroes TOO EPIC?! (And How We’d FIX Them)
Jinx January 28, 202629
22
29 Likes
In today’s show, we discuss Epic Heroes in the 40k Meta! Are they too cheap? Should there be restrictions on taking them since they appear everywhere?! How would YOU fix them? Join the discussion in the comments below! 👇
🎥 Want even more Tabletop Tactics videos? Check out our website and sign up for On Demand!
📱 Download our App for videos on the go, or to take part in the League! Available on Android and iOS
👾 We finally have a discord for On Demand Members JOIN US HERE!
🎲 Like to roll in style? Tabletop Tactics Merchandise
🛒 For all your hobby and gaming needs, visit Tabletop Tactics’ sponsors Element Games
🛒 Or for our viewers in the US Wargames Portal
🎵 Music is licensed from their respective Artists at Premium Beat
Related View More
Jinx January 29, 20269
3
Imperial Knights vs Chaos Knights | Warhammer 40k Battle Report
Jinx January 27, 202657
8
Tyranids vs Genestealer Cults | Warhammer 40k Battle Report
Jinx January 24, 202660
7
*NEW DETACHMENTS!* Ultramarines vs Necrons | Warhammer 40k Battle Report
Jinx January 23, 202625
7
Ultramarines | Warhammer 40k Faction Focus
Jinx January 21, 202644
19
What Units Every Warhammer 40k Chaos Legion Needs
Jinx January 20, 2026131
14
100000% agree on the Force Org being gone was a huge mistake.
Please do a video on force organisation! For me it was an integral part of army building and the last residue of 40K being a ‘war game’ in the classic sense.
Alter CP to not generate throughout the game but are instead a resource you spend on epic heros and stratagems at the beginning of the game. Defined amounts to spend, game size dependant with no increases based on certain models being in the list shenanigans, and a defined number of epic heros allowed, game size dependant (epic heros still cost points, you just have to dedicate some of your CP as well). Introduce a rule that a unit may only benfit from 1 stratagem at a time. Remove any CP generation or cost increase mechanics from the game, replacing with… Read more »
Epic hero’s could be limited to 2-3 max.
Also, any chance The Night Lords can have an epic hero? Haha
Some epic heroes like Tyranids are kinda lack luster. Like deathleaper and lictor has the same damage output, you’re spending 20 points for a 4+ invuln and a extra wound on a utility unit for secondaries.
Until sub assault, the hive tyrant was better, cheaper, and more useful than the Swarmlord. With sub assault you do have access of a teleporting vect aura so that’s pretty neat I guess.
Old one eye makes a unit that hits on 4s hit reliably for 330 points. It’s a huge chunk of your army.
As a Death Guard player, I feel like we have the opposite problem with the number of normal characters compared to the uniqueness of Epic Heroes. Typhus is far from an auto-take. GW ran out of ideas by the time they got to Typhus. He gives -1 to hit in melee…which isn’t very epic. There’s Enhancements that do the same thing and more. His ability isn’t nearly on the same level as most other armies’ Epic Heroes. Sure, he has a psychic attack too, but that’s another story about removing that phase of the game and it effectively replacing the… Read more »
I’d make it so Epic Heroes must be your warlord, therefore you can only have one per army.
It’s wild to be playing Calgar AND Cato AND Titus at the same time.
Absolutely want the ability for my home made “generic” captains etc the possibility to BECOME EPIC! That’s half the fun of running one. He’s not Calgar, he’s just a captain nobody’s ever heard of… until now.
We need force organisation charts back, and options/customisation beyond two or three options for generic heros rather then tenths bland hero hammer.
I think they need to bring back force org charts.
I’m slowly getting into heresy and I really like having the force org back. But I think this could work well for 40K… you can only take an epic hero per 1000ptd (or whatever value) and the really big ones (primarchs, silent king etc) only in 3000pt game
I liked the different angles brought in. Appreciated MM’s point that “without my cool Salamander heroes, am I even a salamander anymore!?”, which, as someone who typically falls into the “boo unique heroes, play your own dudes!” camp, wasn’t something I’d appreciated.
Really loved the discussion about “Warlord” and the missed opportunity for design space there. You could imagine characters that apply their rule to a single unit, but then when elevated to Warlord apply it to a whole army. As an Ork player who longs for Mekbosses and Weirdbosses, would be a really fun way to create list diversity.
Hiya, I love the idea of bringing in warlord traits that can’t be given to epic heroes and adding relics for non-epic characters to make base characters a bit more unique. On another note as a salamanders player I love Vulkan his rules are good and he gives me an in lore excuse to run a combined army of salamanders and their successors. He absolutely should be required to be a warlord or have abilities that activate upon being made a warlord (the infernus oc and actions rule namely) I have only ever played 10th edition and have always thought… Read more »
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again… competitive play is ruining 40k.
I definitely think that concept and the reality of a unit being an auto take has definitely impacted the enjoyment I get from list building.
As a dark angels player not taking azrael just makes your list worse. I’ve built and played lists that are a bit more thematic and have always just thought “yeah should’ve taken azrael”.
I have loads of characters that just don’t see the light of day because of this and in 9th many if these were my favourite to run.
In the segment you had with Bricky a while back, he brought up the idea of varying the point cost of characters attached to certain units and Mike brought it back up here. That would be a very elegant solution to help balance out certain rules interactions while creating incentives to run different combinations of rules. Obviously, a Captain will have an outsized benefit leading Bladguard compared to Intercessors, but I don’t think that balancing the Captain and Bladguard around that combo is fair to the person who wants to use a Captain with Intercessors. I also agree that Epic… Read more »
That was an interesting discussion. Glad to hear chef opinions!! 😊
Really like the idea of the cost of leading a unit being different depending on which unit is being led.
In our map Campaign we made it so warlords have access to 3 unique generic relics that make them either more offensive, defensive, or has a cp farm of some kind. Still seeing lots of epics but we say they have to be the warlord so the miss out on the free upgrade
Some level of limitation is need, I get that people like herohammer and being able to take groups of heroes is in some cases narrative. But when they are everywhere it really does detract from the narrative experience. I do miss being able to forge your own heroes tale with a standard captain etc.
I would also say that some of the other leader units that are supposed to rare would benefit from being made epic heroes, gone are the days when Daemon Princes were cool or rare. Now they are just dime a dozen scumbags.
Ragnars rule has nailed it, he gives a certain rule based on what he’s leading. Blood claws or wolf guard.
Maybe they get the captain rule and only an extra rule when they’re leading maybe battleline or a specific unit?
Titus leading assault Intercessors is very different to bladeguard for example. Let him lead anything, but the special rule comes from leading the RIGHT unit
Missing the Wednesday Live Streams :(, are they returning at any point?