Wrathmongers or Skull Reapers ?

[pt_22]

I have a box that can be made into either Wrathmongers or Skull Reapers,  does anyone have experience running both and what are their thoughts on each?  I have read the other thread on Wrathmongers and how to use them, but what about the Skull reapers?

Wrathmongers - Great at killing monsters/large units. Can provide a buff to other units - hard to use in game. Have a 2" range - which on 40mm bases can be very useful.  Can be in trouble if they get into combat against basic troops who attack back with double attacks.

Skull Reapers - Do on average the same # of wounds as Wrathmongers per turn but have a 4+ save giving slightly more staying power.  The advantage with these guys is if they go against smaller units and kill 5+ models they do 1.5 more wounds per combat phase...

I've been leaning towards Wrathmongers because I like the look of models better, but lastnight saw some very cool SkullReapers on the AOSFans' FB page that's opened up the option of either again.

I suppose the most common reply will be "what are your opponents taking?"... And I don't know yet. AOS is only just starting to get a hold in NZ, I went to my first major tournament on the weekend and the armies were a complete mix of anything and everything - most people using older Warhammer models.

[Ansuz]

I would go with the Skullreapers mainly because the Skull-collecting rule is fluffy as hell.

[DamonRafael]

My suggestion is to build them up in the way you like them more, basically.

As for the in-game utility, they are both good units. I would say that if you plan to play bloodreavers, wrathmongers are a solid choice. On the other hand, skullreapers are tougher, and are probably a bit easier to play, but they are less useful against small armies, as they really bright vs swarm units.

I actually have a unit of Wrathmonger, but the second box is on the way to build them up as skullreapers

[Nico]

Wrathmongers are the best Khorne unit by some way - especially with the Bloodstorm formation (3 units) for battleshock immunity bubble and -1 to hit with shooting. It's all about the Bloodfury ability. Elite units, heroes and especially monsters will try to kill themselves when they kill a Wrathmonger. There's a trend towards monster mash and smaller elite armies, which Wrathmongers hard counter.

[Gaz Taylor]

55 minutes ago, DamonRafael said:

My suggestion is to build them up in the way you like them more, basically.

I would say this. Go with the rule of cool for Age of Sigmar. If it looks cool to you, go for it

But as @Nico has mentioned, if you have lots of heros and monsters in your local scene, go for Wrathmongers, especially if you can take the Bloodstorm Battalion. Otherwise, go for Skullreapers.

But never forget the rule of cool

 

[RuneBrush]

I've been asking myself the same question recently   I've not played any AoS games yet (in fact I only put paint to miniature on the 22nd May) and thinking of picking up a box as the first troop addition to my army.

The two units appear to be polar opposites as you've highlighted and ultimately I'm planning on having access to both within my army.  Skullreapers appear - on paper - to be easier to get to grips with, not as complex to field and don't buff your opponent, so personally I'm looking at adding them first (though hoping I can use the helmeted rather than bare heads).  Wrathmongers are a bit more tricky to learn to use properly (lots of posts on the internet asking how to do this) so probably not great when you're first cutting your teeth on the Bloodbound, but would make an ideal expansion once you've got to grips with how it all works.

@Gaz Taylor is right though in saying that you should pick what appeals visual and/or what you're likely to field your army against   I love the look of the Wrathmongers - nutters wielding flails round!  And I certainly will be building up a unit at some point.

[Rhellion]

Always Wrathmongers... until you have 3 nits of them for the formation.

[pt_22]

Thanks for all the thoughts on either side.  Like I said the rule of cool doesn't really apply because I quite like the looks of both... Yea long term that probably means the simple answer is - BOTH.  Might get the parts out of the box and see what appeals to put together.

The other draw card with Skullreapers is their formation - which makes a Khorgorath marginally worth taking... (Of which I have 3 from starter sets, so it'd be nice to get use out of them!).

But perhaps the thing that's keeping my eye on the Wrathmongers is regardless of if they are giving me or my opponent a +1 attack they will cause carnage on the battlefield - which is always fun to watch!

[mrstimpson38]

On 6/8/2016 at 11:55 PM, pt_22 said:

But perhaps the thing that's keeping my eye on the Wrathmongers is regardless of if they are giving me or my opponent a +1 attack they will cause carnage on the battlefield - which is always fun to watch!

This.

Out of every Bloodbound unit I have, these guys are the most fun to play with (i am fond of my unit of 3 custom khorgoraths). Either they're causing your side or your opponents side to go crazy with attacks, or they're making a unit of Retributors pop themselves. Either way they're a blast to field. And the suggestions to get at least 15  to field the formation are spot on. That formation is great because you don't get to use Bloodfury in your battleshock phase and the extra attacks are an alright bonus as well.

[Chrispcritter]

If you magnetise the torsos to the legs, each box can be both units.