If the Hunter had Beastkiller as a special rule?

If the Hunter had Beastkiller as a special rule included in his price would you take one more often?

Personally I would need it to be +1 to wound AND to hit large targets, then a hunter might make it into my lists abit more often.

possably, although the 8th edition rules already make big monsters a gamble because of cannons and such. The Ironblaster does a similer job for around the same cost AND they don't compete with our very competitive hero points.

The problem with the hunter is that he just doesn't have a role that isn't better filled elsewhere.

I know I'm taking my own thread off topic here but why the hell cant a hunter ride a thundertusk?!
I take my thundertusk alot and I dont see why thundertusk lovers dont get that extra option. It makes no sense rule or fluff wise.

There are only two ways to make Hunters appear in mildly competitive lists of up to 2500-3000pts:

1) Move him into another slot.

2) Make him better than a FB.

2) Make him better than a FB.

I'd like to see that. It's hard to beet an ogre that looks like Dhalsim, can Yoga Fire, Yoga Flame and Yoga Blast.

If the hunter looked like Chun-Li and was able to Hyakuretsu Kyaku. Then maybe the hunter would be viable.

I like the hunter in the hero slot actually....but I never take him because I cannot find the points.  The Loner rule makes him worse (even though he has better stats and different weapon options) than a Bruiser even though he costs more than a bruiser.

I'd like to see the Hunter:
1)  Cost 75 points.
2)  Can no longer join sabretusk packs, truly making him a loner.
3)  Add Scout as an option for 35 points (but cannot be mounted if this option is taken).
4)  Beastkiller still be a 20 point Big Name upgrade, but gives +1 to hit and +1 to wound Large Targets.
5)  Be able to be mounted on a Stonehorn OR Thundertusk for 230 points (slight discount for displacing the ogre from the rare version of the beast).
6)  Everything else stay unchanged.

I think he'd be a lot more takeable, but not broken by any means.  Even with these changes, it's an expensive 4 wound single model for being able to dish out only a medium amount of damage.

If the hunter was cheaper and could be a scout I probably still wouldn't take him over scouting Maneaters. At 110, he's slightly cheaper but a lot more likely to be sniped by a cannon or spell. 

Your scouting hunter is a fair bit more expensive than a Gorger which I consider better provided you can get him on the table.

If the hunter was cheaper and could be a scout I probably still wouldn't take him over scouting Maneaters. At 110, he's slightly cheaper but a lot more likely to be sniped by a cannon or spell. 

Your scouting hunter is a fair bit more expensive than a Gorger which I consider better provided you can get him on the table.

While that is true, his magic item allowance would give him access to things like the charmed shield and opal amulet, which you could use to make up for this problem and he'd still be cheaper than the maneaters, be able to turn for free (as a single model) and have a smaller footprint. That would make him a viable alternative.
If he got M7 when joining Sabretusks, this would also make that unit more viable.
I find the best alternative for him now is on a Stonehorn, but the problem is the Hero points. Assuming you take a BSB, its means for the BSB and Hunter to enjoy their full magic allowance you need to be playing 2500+ points. It also means foregoing on a hero level caster of any kind unless you are playing 3000+ points, which means you are locked into playing a single Slaughtermaster as caster, which dictates your magic build.

While that is true, his magic item allowance would give him access to things like the charmed shield and opal amulet, which you could use to make up for this problem and he'd still be cheaper than the maneaters, be able to turn for free (as a single model) and have a smaller footprint. That would make him a viable alternative.

I suspect any enemy I play would "test" to see if I had such an item with a magic missile or other shooting. Yes, it's viable and slightly less expensive but generally it's going to be worth spending the extra points on Maneaters.

What the Hunter really needs is a good role against monsters. Scouting and d3 woulds against large targets would be a good start, but he's still in a very competitive slot. As a Special with those rules, I would be much more likely to take him.

If the hunter looked like Chun-Li and was able to Hyakuretsu Kyaku. Then maybe the hunter would be viable.

Chun who ?

<=

How 'bout something like this... Against all swarms,war beast,and monsters,he'd get some kind of bonus,being able to hunt and kill any beast,large or small. If you wanted to go crazy with the idea,you could make the bonus be tied to big names,though I think he would be better off having  the bonus as a rule. Might make him a little more "hunt-y".

Well, fighting lords have a problem anyways, and most people only take a fighting lord primarily for the higher leadership or leadership rerolls.

I think a nice alternative might be, "all Gnoblar trappers, Thundertusks, Stonehorns, Sabretusks, and Yhetees within 6 inches of the Hunter can use his leadership as if he was the army general."

Which is sad, because we used to take a Tyrant not only for his Ld boost, but also for his ability to take the tenderizer and still have item allowance to protect himself.  Without the tenderizer, there aren't (imo) any point effective options that make taking him worth it in terms of dealing out damage vs an equally points number of bulls or IGs.

I will always take a hunter against skaven. They love to snack on skitterleaping grey seers...

Why would anyone ever make that colossal mistake, though? If the Grey Seer is Skitterleaping and not on his Bell throwing all kinds of doom at you, the Skaven player already lost. If you want to deliver some nasty spell or whatnot, there's always Warlock Engineers, who cost next to nothing.

If the Grey Seer is Skitterleaping and not on his Bell throwing all kinds of doom at you, the Skaven player already lost...

1. I do not think he can skitterleap on his bell. The bell counts as a mount and I believe the spell only works on infantry characters. (But I may be wrong about this).
2. I usually play against my skaven friend in a 1.5k game. So no bell.
3. We usually play with alot of building terrain, so skitterleap is awesome. And hunter and kitties are useful for hunting him down.

1500 points is a fairly small game.

besides, a sabretusk would be much better at running around munching lone mages.

It's true, he can't Skitterleap while on his bell. But that's not the point - the Grey Seer is the Skaven's meal ticket, there's never a good reason to risk that many points out on their own like that. It's just a bad tactical decision.