new death battletome announced!

[smucreo]

4 minutes ago, Commisarp said:

Thinking about it, I notice that with the exception of the heralds none of the leaked warscrolls have any pictures. This would be very strange.

Not since the compendium have we had pictureless scrolls. 

The recently released Maggotkin of Nurgle Battletome has many pictureless scrolls in it.

[TheWilddog]

Yeah now after looking them over more closely I am not sure. The formatting seems somewhat weird.  Some of the scrolls without a lot of text have image overlays in the blank space but some with huge spaces do not. 

Also, why would the new Knight of Shrouds have the new Deathly Invocation power if Heroes like the Wight King do as well?

Guess we will have to wait and see.  

[smucreo]

Again, the most recent battletome, Maggotkin of Nurgle, has no images in the Warscrolls. Some are even sharing a page with another one. That would explain the blank spaces you see.

For now my assumption is that they are real. They were leaked in the app. Not in some random source on the internet.

[haneybird]

The only thing suggesting these are not real is that no one has produced the PDF files yet. The AOS app downloads and stores the warscrolls as PDF files on the phone or tablet that is running the app.

As long as all we have to go on is blurry images they remain suspect. PDF files taken directly from the files on a phone that downloaded them would go a long way towards proving this.

[Undeadly]

4 hours ago, swarmofseals said:

I've been debating back and forth about whether I should post this. Hopefully this wasn't the wrong call.

The negativity in the thread is getting extremely repetitive. There's more wheel spinning going on here than in the Khemri Hippodrome. It wasn't that long ago that we had this post chiding us not to engage in exactly this kind of behavior.

The fact of the matter is that we don't have much to go on right now. These "leaked" warscrolls may or may not be accurate, and we certainly don't have anything solid on the *several* sets of supplementary abilities that we have. We also don't have the points values which makes a MASSIVE difference. We also know there is a big FAQ and errata update coming which could hugely change the context in which we'd be interpreting these new rules.

When you start spitting venom because GW put together an amazing trailer teasing new stuff for a faction that has been just as left out as yours is, you know it's getting to a toxic level. 

I'm as invested in Death as anyone here. Let's take a breath and reserve judgment until we have the whole picture and better yet have had a chance to actually play some games with it.

 

In many ways, I agree with this post. After looking over my prior posts, I realize they were perhaps a little overtly negative, and that I should be taking these supposed leaks with a bit more grace, so I do apologize for that. Afterall, like you said, we have no idea what these books will actually contain. We know we are GURANTEED the following:

6 Allegiances

At least 1 Spell list

At least 1 Relic list

At least 1 Warlord Trait list

And any number of Battalions.

That right there is a HUGE amount of variation and customization options right there, opening the door to a wide variety of different play styles, and will regardlessly reinvent the way that we play Death, for better or worse. I will, nevermind of what the book brings us, pick up a copy, if only to show that there is an active want for more models, rules, and factions for GA: Death, along with the possibility of having new and awesome rules. And even if these "leaks" are true, I think they are still far more thematic than the prior system of Banners. It gives us a more strategic way to play our army, allowing us to play an active roll in the regeneration of our troops, aswell as forcing us to focus on our Heros, much like how VC used to. Even the banner change is invocative of the old fear rules that we had.

 

But for as much as I praise the ideas and apologize for the negativity that I endorsed, you have to understand: There is a underlying frustration for many Death Players when it comes to this update.

Prior to the reveal of the Knight of Shadows, Death Players had already felt a bit left behind when it came to models and rules. Outside of the GH and the FEC, every other GA had already recieved at least some new miniatures, or direction for their overall GA. So when the KoS was teased, and Malign Portents was teased, there was a huge wave of hype. Hype that slowly petered out, and than abruptly died when it was revealed that each faction would get a model along the lines of the Knight.

Hope was born again when Malign portents was teased more indepth, giving nods to the idea that SOMETHING was going to come for Death. I will note that MP is still ongoing, and that once again, SOMETHING will be released for Death, outside of LoN, but I think the time frame for this overall event is far too sluggish and drawnout. If they wanted to simply change the tone of AoS, there was no need to feature Death so heavily. 

But MP is another thing all together at this point. What matters is that when many Death Players were at the peak of their anticipation, GW released Maggotkin. It was obvious that they would release them at some point, considering the BoN leak, so I'll give GW that. But many people had waited that entire month hoping and speculating that Death would directly get something. But instead, many players felt confused and dismayed at the fact that the almost 7 month long buildup was not what they had anticipated. Should they have anticipated a release? Who knows? Thats another question all together. But it still left a bit of resentment.

Than, came the announcement of LoN. This once again, inspired hope for Death Players pretty universally, and for many, still does. Like I said above, it will offer a wider variety of ways to play, and still be a great addition overall to AoS, even if its just for the lore and depth it will add to the setting. I'll even say that the MP stories are all superb, and were worth the count down. But then as we come near our current time, we hit a sudden deluge of decidedly non-death releases. Custodes get a nice release, and now we have the Daughters of Khaine teaser, which once again, features a new line of miniatures, this time for AoS to boot. Than, worst of all, we get these supposed "leaks". Leaks that propose some drastic changes that do little to actually alleviate the problems that Death faces as a faction. While I no have idea as to the validity of the leaks, I think it does demonstrate something very important;

There are a LOT, and I do mean a lot of hopes piled on this book, primarily due to the amount of frustration that a good deal of Death Players feel. We have been give the bare minimun of updates for the majority of AoS, and now that we get an event that seems to be focused around Death, it seemingly gets overshadowed by Nurgle, Custodes and DoK, all of which all, by the way, look absolutely fantastic.

Personally, I do lay a good measure of blame at GW's door. But not out of any vindictive nature or anger, or any of wish to purposefully snub Death. I mostly blame them for their vagueness and their inability to communicate on a variety of subjects. If they had just told us what they planned to do, what exactly MP was, and maybe given us a better clue on what was to come, things would have gone much smoother, rather than their policy of simply saying "Oh, we haven't forgotten about you!" time and time again.

In short, I have no doubt that what ever GW releases will be good, and that Death will get more this coming year. But they have unintetionally created a good deal of this negativity due to their own mistakes and mishandling of the MP event and their release schedule. To put it bluntly, you can't expect to tell your average Death player to simply "Wait some more." Nor can you expect them to not freak out a little when what we see of the new book removes a core mechanic, and does little to show how it fixes the problems we already have.

 

[Raloon]

11 minutes ago, Undeadly said:

 

In many ways, I agree with this post. After looking over my prior posts, I realize they were perhaps a little overtly negative, and that I should be taking these supposed leaks with a bit more grace, so I do apologize for that. Afterall, like you said, we have no idea what these books will actually contain. We know we are GURANTEED the following:

6 Allegiances

At least 1 Spell list

At least 1 Relic list

At least 1 Warlord Trait list

And any number of Battalions.

That right there is a HUGE amount of variation and customization options right there, opening the door to a wide variety of different play styles, and will regardlessly reinvent the way that we play Death, for better or worse. I will, nevermind of what the book brings us, pick up a copy, if only to show that there is an active want for more models, rules, and factions for GA: Death, along with the possibility of having new and awesome rules. And even if these "leaks" are true, I think they are still far more thematic than the prior system of Banners. It gives us a more strategic way to play our army, allowing us to play an active roll in the regeneration of our troops, aswell as forcing us to focus on our Heros, much like how VC used to. Even the banner change is invocative of the old fear rules that we had.

 

But for as much as I praise the ideas and apologize for the negativity that I endorsed, you have to understand: There is a underlying frustration for many Death Players when it comes to this update.

Prior to the reveal of the Knight of Shadows, Death Players had already felt a bit left behind when it came to models and rules. Outside of the GH and the FEC, every other GA had already recieved at least some new miniatures, or direction for their overall GA. So when the KoS was released, and Malign Portents was released, there was a huge wave of hype. Hype that slowly petered out, and than abruptly died when it was revealed that each faction would get a model along the lines of the Knight.

Hope was born again when Malign portents was released, giving nods to the idea that SOMETHING was going to come for Death. I will note that MP is still ongoing, and that once again, SOMETHING will be released for Death, outside of LoN, but I think the time frame for this overall event is far too sluggish and drawnout. If they wanted to simply change the tone of AoS, there was no need to feature Death so heavily. 

But MP is another thing all together at this point. What matters is that when many Death Players were at the peak of their anticipation, GW released Maggotkin. It was obvious that they's do release them, I'll give GW that. But many people had waited that entire month hoping and speculating that Death would directly get something. But instead, many players felt confused and dismayed at the fact that the almost 7 month long buildup was not what they had anticipated. Should they have anticipated a release? Who knows? Thats another question all together. But it still left a bit of resentment.

Than, came the announcement of LoN. This once again, inspired hope for Death Players pretty universally, and for many, still does. Like I said above, it will offer a wider variety of ways to play, and still be a great addition overall to AoS, even if its just for the lore and depth it will add to the setting. I'll even say that the MP stories are all superb, and make the countdown worth it. But then as we come near our current time, we hit a sudden deluge of decidedly non-death releases. Custodes get a nice release, and now we have the Daughters of Khaine teaser, which once again, features a new line of miniatures, this time for AoS to boot. Than, worst of all, we get these supposed "leaks". Leaks that propose some drastic changes that do little to actually alleviate the problems that Death faces as a faction. While I have idea as to the validity of the leaks, I think it does demonstrate something very important;

There are a LOT, and I do mean a lot of hopes piled on this book, primarily due to the amount of frustration that a good deal of Death Players feel. We have been give the bare minimun of updates for the majority if AoS, and now that we get an event that seems to be focused around Death, it seemingly gets overshadowed by Nurgle, Custodes and DoK, all of which all look absolutely fantastic model ranges by the way.

Personally, I do lay a good measure of blame at GW's door. But not out of any vindictive nature or anger. I mostly blame them for their vagueness and their inability to communicate on a variety of subjects. If they had just told us what they planned to do, what exactly MP was, and maybe given us a better clue on what was to come, rather than simply say "Oh, we haven't forgotten about you!" 

In short, I have no doubt that what ever GW releases will be good, and that Death will get more this coming year. But they have unintetionally created a good deal of this negativity due to their own mistakes and mishandling of the MP event and their releade schedule. To put it bluntly, you can't expect to tell your average Death player to simply "Wait some more." Nor can you expect them to not freak out a little when what we see of the new book removes a core mechanic, and does little to show how it fixes the problems we already have.

 

Made an account just to second this. It's seriously frustrating. Like another poster said, Death has been in a perpetual state of "the next book will fix it" and then we just get a drip feed of rules changes. Then when we have an event with Nagash as the big baddie, with a new website and a month long countdown, we get Nurgle demons. Then when we get a new battletome announced, they then show off new models for yet another order faction (that said, the DoK models look great). There's only so many times I can have the carrot stuck out at me before I just move on. Good news is, necrons are getting a codex soon so I have something to move on to. Sorry if I come off as salty, I'm just really, well, salty.

[Sception]

Has there been confirmation of a spell lore?  I mean, there's pretty much got to be one, but I don't recall specific official confirmation.

[Neinball]

3 hours ago, Sception said:

Has there been confirmation of a spell lore?  I mean, there's pretty much got to be one, but I don't recall specific official confirmation.

Not that I've seen and the community team's comments on FB only mention Artefacts and Command Traits. 

[Malakithe]

Im willing to bet there will be more then one spell lore. Im thinking LoN will be in the newer style battletome format that started with Disciples of Tzeentch. 

Im guessing there will be traits/item/lores based on if they are vamps or 'mortals' ie necromancers or some kind of similar format

[Jamopower]

Interesting to see if all of the allegiances will have their own artefacts and command traits, because that is a lot of content. 12 pages would need to be just for that.

[Cargo Cult]

I’m going to take a deep breath and just call it as I see it as well. 

I respect this forum a lot. I’m new here and am definitely on the casual end of the player spectrum. Basically I play with my boys and my nephews.

The level of knowledge and investment in the hobby is very impressive. Also the respect is great. No one gets shouted down.

However I am finding it a bit gloomy to be honest. Personally I’m really excited about the Death developments. The new warscrolls (if genuine) already look interesting and are a small leak of a book we haven’t got as part of a campaign we haven’t played as part of a year that’s hardly started.

I certainly endorse the points above about the big countdown and then limited initial product, but that doesn’t mean the whole thing is a bust. You don’t have to look far back in the Death forum to find lots of views that we would not get a battle tome this year and the first is already coming.

If a player who’s current painting projects are Carrion and Sepulchral Stalkers can be optimistic...........

[CoffeeGrunt]

I'm waiting for the book personally, but I've bought everything I want in Death. If GW don't give me a reason to expand my collection, they don't get any more of my money for that range. Simple. 

[RoyalDachshund]

2 hours ago, Cargo Cult said:

I’m going to take a deep breath and just call it as I see it as well. 

I respect this forum a lot. I’m new here and am definitely on the casual end of the player spectrum. Basically I play with my boys and my nephews.

The level of knowledge and investment in the hobby is very impressive. Also the respect is great. No one gets shouted down.

However I am finding it a bit gloomy to be honest. Personally I’m really excited about the Death developments. The new warscrolls (if genuine) already look interesting and are a small leak of a book we haven’t got as part of a campaign we haven’t played as part of a year that’s hardly started.

I certainly endorse the points above about the big countdown and then limited initial product, but that doesn’t mean the whole thing is a bust. You don’t have to look far back in the Death forum to find lots of views that we would not get a battle tome this year and the first is already coming.

If a player who’s current painting projects are Carrion and Sepulchral Stalkers can be optimistic...........

6

Problem is that GW itself makes things hard - leaked warscrolls that shows couple of nerfs and a rather strange new approach that brings more problems, at least on their own, on paper; big "death-themed" countdown leading to arguably nothing interesting game-wise and almost two years of "releasing a book that will fix things" that continue to mess things up even more.

Then there is a feeling that those 500-600$ you've spent on the army is sitting on shelf gathering dust since it's more or less useless in the way that game is played now. That thought that if you only bought other armies you wouldn't be scraping for lowest positions on your local tournament events for two years now. And believe me, I know that feeling well, being both BCR and Death player. Kinda turns your "2-3 game nights and tournament a month" into "I'll maybe go next month".

I've picked AoS as soon as matched play started and after having a pre-2017 blast with BCR (or at least a decent fighting) now most of my games (and I've played about 20 when GH2017 started) looks like "setting army, enemy have turn, I have no heroes left, I pack my things" and nothing hinted in warscrolls looks like a fix. I don't believe we will get an "All death units ignores MW"(or all Death heroes can redirect wounds to units, or whatever over the top ability we will need) type of treatment nor that the traits and artifacts will help much since that majority of our more durable heroes are named, and smaller ones, our beckons of resurrecting/healing are a target practice for shooty units. Even halving costs points for all Death units will still lead to us being an immobile iceberg (now without a possibility to grab an objective via summoning spell cast from one of our big mages) that just sits there and smile. Sure, we do see a portion of a whole picture, but you can tell quite much from it.

It is only natural that you look at your hobby spendings, last two years of death, last two years of GW treatment of Death and feel a little bit gloomy.

As a player with experience that I've posted, I don't feel right telling people that "they will fix death" or "Oh boy, a new Death book!" even "let's wait and see". I don't feel that GW earned a free "get out of jail card" or that I shouldn't be negative. I'm negative and frankly, a little pissed-off. After all, to some degree, I'm a client that spent money on "hey we're fixing it in the next book" promises. And I won't be anymore.  Not after FAQ1 that was going to fix Death, not after FCE book that was going to fix Death, GH2017, and FAQ2. Nor I'll give them anything but skepticism and hard times. If they do fix Death and bring it back to the tables I won't be doing "Oh thank you glorious lords!", I'll rather be "Well, about damn f... time".

End of rant Now let's see if they are able to amaze me

[Aginor]

If those are fake I am super happy.

It is always possible to have such stuff faked, in fact it is pretty easy.

So if they are:  hope we get some real info soon.

12 hours ago, Commisarp said:

Thinking about it, I notice that with the exception of the heralds none of the leaked warscrolls have any pictures. This would be very strange.

Not since the compendium have we had pictureless scrolls. 

The SCE Battletome also has pictureless warscrolls and so has the Sylvaneth one. That alone isn't an indicator IMO.

 

About that Wight King with Black Axe, it just has to be a joke. Why would they reduce his damage to 1? With that scroll I probably wouldn't even play him if he was 60 points since he would take up a hero slot that you could use better for something else.

The only good thing about that change would be that IF you get him into range and he rolls lucky he could even one-hit Alarielle or Nagash on a 6.  But I think only the biggest gamblers would play him because of that off chance. I like the way he is now and hope he stays that way.

[AverageBoss]

6 hours ago, Jamopower said:

Interesting to see if all of the allegiances will have their own artefacts and command traits, because that is a lot of content. 12 pages would need to be just for that.

Not necessarily. DoT fit 18 command traits (6 each for mortals, daemons, and arcanites) on 1 page.

[shinros]

Guys moonstone in the rumour thread said that he is pretty sure that the warscrolls are real.

[Vitch_EGS]

Hey so on the offchance the Morghast can now use which ever weapons they like, will both options still be deent or will one very quickly never be seen again?

Have a second box ready to assemble and after making the halberd version they look so good im tempted to not bother making the dual sword version.

[Aginor]

I think both have their uses, but I also prefer halberds.

[Acid_Nine]

So, the deathly incantation thing... how the heck is it supposed to work in regards to models lost? are you suppposed to pick a unit of skeletons, roll a d3 to see how many models come back, then roll another to see how many you actually can put back? so if you heal 3 wounds but only roll a 1 on the second D3, can you only put one skeleton back? if you want to bring spirit hosts back for one base, do you have to roll 2 6's to bring back one base? 

if these scrolls are real this seems like a massive overcomplication compared to the old "Bring back D6 per hero phase", which in of itself is not very good compared to ghouls bringing back dead on a 2+ (current incarnation). even so both these have a big weakness to bad luck or double turns, so I see no reason to nerf this as well as make it more complex...

 

Heck, plague bearers still have the standard thing and they are the newest battletome, so if it's just a shift in design why change it when they released a unit with an ability so close to the current standard? in fact, why get rid of the Vampire Lord's signature spell when almost every warscroll for new factions have both the listed spell AND are able to choose from the battletome list?

[Mikeymajq]

Edit: clarification. You roll one d3. It heals that many wounds. If there are no wounds suffered, for example on skeleton warriors who only have one wound anyway: D3 slain models are returned to the unit. So d3 skeleton warriors. If there is a model in the unit that has suffered wounds it instead heals d3 wounds back up to its startibg value. 

 

I ended up liking the deathless invocation after I had time to let it all sink in. But you're right, I've no idea how it's meant to work with multiwound models or if you roll too low to bring back a spirit host, for example. Not sure if it's intended or not. Not sure what you mean avout rolling a 2nd time tho'

I'm quessing the rewrite on ethereals is pure abuse-proofing but it kinda works against stuff that lowers saves without being rend.

[Aginor]

 I think it works this way for Spirit Hosts:

Situation: a unit of six Spirit Hosts and two Necromancers within range for the ability.

An enemy inflicts four wounds on the Spirit Hosts (killing one model and putting one wound on another).

Now it is the Death player's turn. Necromancer #1 rolls a 3. That's the same result as a 2 in this case because the heal cannot spill over and create a Spirit Host model.

Now Necromancer #2 rolls his dice. If he manages to roll a 3 he creates a new Spirit Host model. A 1 or 2 does nothing.

 

Bottom line: Spirit Hosts are harder to regenerate than Skeletons. Which is OK I think.

[Mikeymajq]

I think that's exactly right. Also means the herors that can reroll the d3 are better att ressing tougher units. 

 

The Summoned keyword restricts the ability somewhat as it would have been soooo great at healing big baddies too.

[Aginor]

12 minutes ago, Mikeymajq said:

I think that's exactly right. Also means the herors that can reroll the d3 are better att ressing tougher units. 

 

The Summoned keyword restricts the ability somewhat as it would have been soooo great at healing big baddies too.

 

I am actually a bit sad that it just doesn't do one or both of the following things:

- create wounded models (so the spillover would work).
- heal heroes.

What I like about that mechanic is that it makes squishy units easier to heal than tougher ones, also that it works on Spirit Hosts now, making Necromancers better for Nighthaunt armies in that regard at least.

I also re-read all the Warscrolls now and there are a few things that are intriguing/cool/sad so I'll make a few posts talking about possible implications soon.

[Mikeymajq]

At first I was super salty about the rule, but after thinking about it I kind of like it. Mind you I am a Deathrattle player so my mind is focused on skellies

Have a few cheap heroes to buff numbers along with your bigger dudes like a Mortarch and you could, if needed, target a single unit several times for different heroes getting back xd3 skeletons is great, even 2d3 is better than d6. And getting more than d3 grave guard back is waaaay better than only d3.  And we can almost count on at least one artefact or command ability to synergize with this. The -1 bravery debuff banner is neat too, and basically add to the deadlyness. And easily synergizes with bravery based attacks such as the tomb banshee (unless they change her attack ofc). 

Plus having the leaders raise the dead back feels a lot more thematic to me

[angrycontra]

I wouldn't be surprised if one of Arkhan's allegiance trait were to be some kind "+1 to all deathly incantation rolls" or similar. Not to mention traits and artifacts (and maybe even spells for that matter) can boost those incantations even further.