Jump to content

Legion of Sacrament List - A Different Take


Lemon Knuckles

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

Noodling a different take on a Legion of Sacrament list and would love to hear thoughts and opinions.  It's basically a Double Dragon list that goes Sacrament for the artefact and command trait rather than going magic heavy.  No Arkhan, no batallion.  I'm not certain how good Mark of the Favored could be, but on a big tanky unit that can heal and that runs some anti-shooting tech I imagine it could put out some mortal wounds.  If nothing else, it gives the opponent something else to worry about.

Critique away!

 

Allegiance: Legion of Sacrament

Leaders

Vampire Lord On Zombie Dragon (440)

- General

- Command Trait : Mark of the Favoured

- Deathlance

- Artefact : Shroud of Darkness

- Lore of the Vampires : Amethystine Pinions

Vampire Lord On Zombie Dragon (440)

- Deathlance

- Lore of the Vampires : Amaranthine Orb

Vampire Lord (140)

- Flying Horror

- Lore of the Vampires : Vile Transference

Necromancer (110)

- Lore of the Deathmages : Overwhelming Dread

Units

40 x Skeleton Warriors (280)

-Ancient Spears

40 x Skeleton Warriors (280)

-Ancient Spears

5 x Dire Wolves (60)

10 x Black Knights (240)

Total: 1990 / 2000

Allies: 0 / 400

Leaders: 4/6 Battlelines: 3 (3+) Behemoths: 2/4 Artillery: 0/4

Wounds: 148

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks pretty solid to me, honestly. LoS has such good artifacts and CT, almost to the point of where I wish we had some better battalions to fit them in with. My only considerations I would have to offer are:

-Maybe consider swapping out 1 skeleton legion for more Direwolves and a Corpse Cart. 

-Finding some room for more points and maaaaybe running Prince Vohldorky over the non-artifact wielding VLoZD. He is basically just an upgrade at this point; a very strong upgrade though. 

-Replacing the Black Knights with Hexwraiths, but BK will do a better job at clearing out Hordes while Hexwraiths will fair better against more elite units. Your skeletons should do a good enough job on holding off enemy troops.'

Just some thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks solid enough to me. 

I will change the command trait and use Mastery of death.  If your set up is right  your skeleton will be able to move extra 3" on your first turn, taking you closer to the objectives while your zombie dragons will rip  your opponent apart.

Another possibility would be to change the command trait for bound to the master. This will be really useful on your early game because your list has a lot of wizards and they all will have +1 to cast ( LoS). Imagine adding 6" to their spell range. I can already  see sparks flying with this. 

Anyway just my humble opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Undeadly said:

Looks pretty solid to me, honestly. LoS has such good artifacts and CT, almost to the point of where I wish we had some better battalions to fit them in with. My only considerations I would have to offer are:

-Maybe consider swapping out 1 skeleton legion for more Direwolves and a Corpse Cart. 

-Finding some room for more points and maaaaybe running Prince Vohldorky over the non-artifact wielding VLoZD. He is basically just an upgrade at this point; a very strong upgrade though. 

-Replacing the Black Knights with Hexwraiths, but BK will do a better job at clearing out Hordes while Hexwraiths will fair better against more elite units. Your skeletons should do a good enough job on holding off enemy troops.'

Just some thoughts.

Points make it tough.  I could swap the 10 Knights for 5 Hexwraiths and then upgrade to Prince V.  I'd probably then put the Pinions on the Prince.  Leaves me with an ugly 50 points to spare.

Or I could drop the Knights for 6 Spirit Hosts.  Lose some mobility, but gain some durability and another source of mortals.  Hmmm....

42 minutes ago, Feche90 said:

It looks solid enough to me. 

I will change the command trait and use Mastery of death.  If your set up is right  your skeleton will be able to move extra 3" on your first turn, taking you closer to the objectives while your zombie dragons will rip  your opponent apart.

Another possibility would be to change the command trait for bound to the master. This will be really useful on your early game because your list has a lot of wizards and they all will have +1 to cast ( LoS). Imagine adding 6" to their spell range. I can already  see sparks flying with this. 

Anyway just my humble opinion.

Yeah, the traits you mention are really good, and I've theorized with Mastery of Death a ton, but I really just noticed Mark of the Favored today and am curious if it could be abused.  For example, a quick bit of math suggests that, say, a block of 40 skelies attacking the general would take 20 mortal wounds back in damage as a result of the Mark.  And with the -2 to shooting, range units will take a mortal every and every time they target him with an attack but will not have a ton of luck getting stuff through.  Maybe I could even re-jig the list to get a bat swarm in there for a -3.  That could be downright filthy.  What's an opponent to do?  They can't really ignore the dragon because he's too much of a threat, but it will hurt like hell to try and take him down.

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly Mark of the Favoured just seems really bad for me. After the errata it deals one mortal wound to the attack unit after all of its attacks have been resolved, and only on a 6+. To my understanding that means that facing a unit of for example 40 skellies is no different than facing a hero, since the potential outcome in both cases is one mortal wound reflected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly with your list I would just go for Mastery of Death and advance everything you feel could get a charge in turn one + slow units line the necro, which will allow you to use him to summon skellies forward to protect him + basically giving extra movement to your skeletons as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, smucreo said:

Honestly Mark of the Favoured just seems really bad for me. After the errata it deals one mortal wound to the attack unit after all of its attacks have been resolved, and only on a 6+. To my understanding that means that facing a unit of for example 40 skellies is no different than facing a hero, since the potential outcome in both cases is one mortal wound reflected.

Yep its now 1 MW regardless and thats only on a 6+ which sucks now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, that's why my take on a different Sacrament build for now would be something like this:

image.png.1d9baa5df326271ade354162b2eb61fa.png

Or this if I wanted do do something similar to what he is doing:

image.png.7ae342f296365e18a45d11c2a6a3b6d2.png

The terrorgheist/zombie dragon are interchangeable.

The first list would use mastery of death to try to boost one VLoZD (+ amethystine pinions) to get a first turn charge if needed, and to boost a necro and the cart to get skellies summoned in a position where they cover the necro. It's more of a "use the magic you get to go to where you want faster and safer thanks to possible unbinds + the crazy artifact from sacrament". The other is more of a cookie cutter build with arkhan, instead focusing in debuffing from range with a vortex and using arkhan's boosts (+4 to cast with the right positioning in this list) to cast soul harvest, amarathine orb and/or vile transference to pepper the enemy in MW while the other behemoths hunt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

7 hours ago, smucreo said:

Honestly Mark of the Favoured just seems really bad for me. After the errata it deals one mortal wound to the attack unit after all of its attacks have been resolved, and only on a 6+. To my understanding that means that facing a unit of for example 40 skellies is no different than facing a hero, since the potential outcome in both cases is one mortal wound reflected.

Wait...  are you guys saying that Mark only has a chance to deal a MW once per attacking unit??  That's not how I read it at all.  40 Skeletons attack 3 times each for 120 attacks total.  Each attack requires a target that must be selected, as the unit could split its attacks anyway it wanted to.  Yes the FAQ changed it so that the attacking unit takes the wounds after its attacks have gone through, but it doesn't say anything about counting all attacks as just 1 attack.  Consider the way the rules are written:

  1. Mark of the Favored:  Each time the General is selected as the target of an attack in the combat phase....
  2. (from Core Rules)  If a model has more than one attack, you can split them between potential target units as you wish
  3. (also from Core Rules) In order to make several attacks at once, all of the attacks must have the same To Hit, To Wound, Rend and Damage, and must be directed at the same enemy

All of this suggests to me that the General would be selected as a target by each and every single attack, and not jut by the attacking unit.  The fact that a unit can roll all of its attack in one big toss of the dice is just an expedient and not an indication that it has only selected a target once.  

I could be wrong, in which case Mark is worse than useless, but based ont he wording, I don;t think I am.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Lemon Knuckles said:

 

Wait...  are you guys saying that Mark only has a chance to deal a MW once per attacking unit??  That's not how I read it at all.  40 Skeletons attack 3 times each for 120 attacks total.  Each attack requires a target that must be selected, as the unit could split its attacks anyway it wanted to.  Yes the FAQ changed it so that the attacking unit takes the wounds after its attacks have gone through, but it doesn't say anything about counting all attacks as just 1 attack.  Consider the way the rules are written:

  1. Mark of the Favored:  Each time the General is selected as the target of an attack in the combat phase....
  2. (from Core Rules)  If a model has more than one attack, you can split them between potential target units as you wish
  3. (also from Core Rules) In order to make several attacks at once, all of the attacks must have the same To Hit, To Wound, Rend and Damage, and must be directed at the same enemy

All of this suggests to me that the General would be selected as a target by each and every single attack, and not jut by the attacking unit.  The fact that a unit can roll all of its attack in one big toss of the dice is just an expedient and not an indication that it has only selected a target once.  

I could be wrong, in which case Mark is worse than useless, but based ont he wording, I don;t think I am.

Based on the FAQs from yesterday:

"On a 6+ the attacking unit suffers 1 mortal wound after all of its attacks have been resolved"

As I read it, a unit attacks, the damage is resolved, and then you roll a dice and on a 6+ you deal a MW back to the unit. It doesn't matter how many attacks are dealt. I think it's what they tried to say at least. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, smucreo said:

Based on the FAQs from yesterday:

"On a 6+ the attacking unit suffers 1 mortal wound after all of its attacks have been resolved"

As I read it, a unit attacks, the damage is resolved, and then you roll a dice and on a 6+ you deal a MW back to the unit. It doesn't matter how many attacks are dealt. I think it's what they tried to say at least. 

Yeah, that was just a change to the last sentence.  It basically states when the damage from Mark is taken.  The first sentence which outlines how many dice to roll remains unchanged.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/27/2018 at 2:12 PM, smucreo said:

Yep, that's why my take on a different Sacrament build for now would be something like this:

image.png.1d9baa5df326271ade354162b2eb61fa.png

Or this if I wanted do do something similar to what he is doing:

image.png.7ae342f296365e18a45d11c2a6a3b6d2.png

The terrorgheist/zombie dragon are interchangeable.

The first list would use mastery of death to try to boost one VLoZD (+ amethystine pinions) to get a first turn charge if needed, and to boost a necro and the cart to get skellies summoned in a position where they cover the necro. It's more of a "use the magic you get to go to where you want faster and safer thanks to possible unbinds + the crazy artifact from sacrament". The other is more of a cookie cutter build with arkhan, instead focusing in debuffing from range with a vortex and using arkhan's boosts (+4 to cast with the right positioning in this list) to cast soul harvest, amarathine orb and/or vile transference to pepper the enemy in MW while the other behemoths hunt.

What are you using to make these sweet graphical lists? 

Im really digging it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I just use Excel and paste images of the units, and on top add a function that sums the points of the units as I add them up. Really I just do it because it looks more clear to me this way haha like a graphic of sorts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Updated list, and some updated strategy behind it.  Real life keeps me busy and I don't get to play nearly as many games as I'd like, so I often have to fill in the blanks by playing test games out in my head.  Would welcome feedback from the smart folks here: make suggestions, poke holes, have at her.

Basic Strategy:

Spoiler

 

Basic strategy would be to deploy the VLoZD top center, the Prince beside the VLoZD on the target flank side, the necro right behind those two, and the skeletons in the grave.  VLoZD uses Dreadknight on itself, VL casts Mystic Shield on the VLoZD, Prince casts Quickblood, and the necro summons the Balewind, pushing the two behemoths forward 5”, then debuffs the most appropriate enemy unit with Dread.  VLoZD and the Prince move diagonally forward toward target flank, with the Prince screened to the outside; both breathe and charge and do some major damage.  VL moves up with 1 unit of wolves as a screen and summons the skeletons facing the middle of the opposite flank to try and hold the enemy from wheeling around.  The other unit of wolves go for objective.  The Hexwraiths are my rover, providing a broad range of options.  Probably either running up further aside the target flank to eventually swing in at enemy heros/support, or else either side to intercept enemy flanking units.

The opponent’s turn is a dilemma, facing two major threats on a crumbling flank, and a horde of regenerating undead blocking their advance.  The Prince is screened by the VLoZD, and the VLoZD itself is a -2 to shooting, 2+ save, that has a 17% chance of dealing a mortal wound for each and every to-hit roll made against him.  In most scenarios, that should mean that an attacking unit will take more damage that it gives if attacking it.  And next turn he can shoot, melee and he should have a decent line to get off a good Orb. 

Yes, it's optimistic and perfect world thinking, but it's my starting point.

 

 

Basic concerns:

Spoiler

 

So.  As the saying goes, sounds great in theory, but in practice….  Concerns:

  1. I’m not sure how this list can handle going second, especially if I didn’t expect to go second and deployed my skeletons in the grave. 
  2. The skeletons are being asked to do a lot of work.  It’s OK if they are wiped, but probably not OK if they are wiped first turn.  I think I really need them to hold the line into the second turn.
  3. Is the +1 allegiance bonus to cast reliable enough?  Failing to get the Balewind off puts a crimp in the plan.  I have Pinions as a backup in case that happens, but that is a big drop off from the primary plan.
  4. I have a 330 point tool-box that is currently outfitted as 10x Hexwraiths.  I think this is the best way to go, although I am also considering 2x Morghasts + 1 more Necromancer, or 10 Black Knights and 1 more chaff unit.

 

 

Here’s the list.  Thoughts and criticisms invited.

Spoiler

 

Allegiance: Legion of Sacrament

Leaders

Vampire Lord On Zombie Dragon (440)

- General

- Command Trait : Mark of the Favoured

- Deathlance

- Artefact : Shroud of Darkness

- Lore of the Vampires : Amaranthine Orb

Prince Vhordrai (480)

- Lore of the Vampires : Amethystine Pinions

Vampire Lord (140)

- Flying Horror

- Lore of the Vampires : Vile Transference

Necromancer (110)

- Lore of the Deathmages : Overwhelming Dread

Units

40 x Skeleton Warriors (280)

-Ancient Spears

5 x Dire Wolves (60)

5 x Dire Wolves (60)

10 x Hexwraiths (320)

Scenery

Balewind Vortex (100)

Total: 1990 / 2000

Allies: 0 / 400

Leaders: 4/6 Battlelines: 4 (3+) Behemoths: 2/4 Artillery: 0/4

Wounds: 118

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/27/2018 at 9:25 AM, Lemon Knuckles said:

 

Wait...  are you guys saying that Mark only has a chance to deal a MW once per attacking unit??  That's not how I read it at all.

@Lemon Knuckles See? ;)

I'm on the same side with Lemon.  The player needs to select a target for each attack, and the rule says selected as the target of "an" attack, not "any" attack.  Just because the opponent says "all 10 of my guys are targeting  your general" it doesn't change from selecting the target(s) for 10 attacks to selecting a target once.

The Errata didn't change when to roll, it just changed when the mortal wound is dealt. Here's the rule before and after:
Original Rule:
"Each time this general is selected as the target of an attack in the combat phase, roll a dice.  On a 6+ the attacking unit suffers a mortal wound."
After Errata:
"Each time this general is selected as the target of an attack in the combat phase, roll a dice.  On a 6+ the attacking unit suffers 1 mortal wound after all of its attacks have been resolved."

The 1 mortal wound after attacks are resolved happens if the dice roll is a 6+.  But the dice roll is still triggered by being selected as the target of an attack.  "An attack" is singular.  "Each time...selected as the target of an attack, roll a dice."  So 10 attacks selecting the general as their target results in 10 rolls.  And for each of those dice rolled, on a 6+ the unit suffers a mortal wound.

If GW's intention was a single roll to try for a single mortal wound, they could have (and should have) updated the text to "Each time an enemy unit selects this general as the target of any attacks, roll a dice."  But they didn't.  Probably because the trait is utterly worthless if it only has a 1-in-6  chance of dealing a single mortal wound (after the general has already been killed by all those attacks, by the way).
 

O

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rob Hawkins said:

@Lemon Knuckles See? ;)

I'm on the same side with Lemon.  The player needs to select a target for each attack, and the rule says selected as the target of "an" attack, not "any" attack.  Just because the opponent says "all 10 of my guys are targeting  your general" it doesn't change from selecting the target(s) for 10 attacks to selecting a target once.

The Errata didn't change when to roll, it just changed when the mortal wound is dealt. Here's the rule before and after:
Original Rule:
"Each time this general is selected as the target of an attack in the combat phase, roll a dice.  On a 6+ the attacking unit suffers a mortal wound."
After Errata:
"Each time this general is selected as the target of an attack in the combat phase, roll a dice.  On a 6+ the attacking unit suffers 1 mortal wound after all of its attacks have been resolved."

The 1 mortal wound after attacks are resolved happens if the dice roll is a 6+.  But the dice roll is still triggered by being selected as the target of an attack.  "An attack" is singular.  "Each time...selected as the target of an attack, roll a dice."  So 10 attacks selecting the general as their target results in 10 rolls.  And for each of those dice rolled, on a 6+ the unit suffers a mortal wound.

If GW's intention was a single roll to try for a single mortal wound, they could have (and should have) updated the text to "Each time an enemy unit selects this general as the target of any attacks, roll a dice."  But they didn't.  Probably because the trait is utterly worthless if it only has a 1-in-6  chance of dealing a single mortal wound (after the general has already been killed by all those attacks, by the way).
 

O

 

I can see that. But its still the worst trait. Taking any ability or spell or anything that requires a 6+ is just plain bad. If this is a competitive list then youll still not use it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Malakithe said:

I can see that. But its still the worst trait. Taking any ability or spell or anything that requires a 6+ is just plain bad. If this is a competitive list then youll still not use it

It basically gives Spectral Touch to any unit attacking your general, except the mortals hit them instead of the target.  People love Spectral Touch (Spirit Hosts, Hexwraiths...).  I don't know yet if it's good or trash, but I want to find out.  Playing out some combats on paper suggests it could be really interesting, with many units taking more damage by attacking then they are able to actually inflict.

11 hours ago, Malakithe said:

Why would you still take Mark over...anything else? Returning 1 MW on a 6+ is arguably the worst trait in the entire game.

A few reasons.  Mostly because part of my enjoyment of the hobby comes from theory-crafting and looking for rogue stuff that doesn't get any attention.  I wouldn't enjoy running the same list as everyone else.  It's always been like that in whatever game I play.  Usually that means I end up with a second-rate list, but sometimes not, and I find those sometimes immensely rewarding. 

My initial reaction when I first read Mark was that it was utter trash.  Didn't give it a second thought.  It wasn't until a few people started asking some specific mechanic questions that I re-read it and thought that maybe there was something useful there.  And when I talk to other people about it, the most common reaction is first, "it's garbage," and then pause, and then, "hey, that's not bad at all."  Too many people are dismissing it out of hand without even thinking about it (I was one of them!).  Or dismissing it without even getting the rules right.  

The other reason is that I'm looking for an answer to our weakness to shooting.  Combined with the artefact and the right list, it could be good tech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here’s two quick examples:

  • 30 Vulkite Bezerkers, throwing axe attacks then charge with double hand-axe, re-rolling failed hits.  They will do an average of 6 damage against the 2+, and take 14 mortals back from Mark, and 10 damage from the general’s counter attack.  Halve all of that with their 4+ ward save, and they lose 12 models from damage, plus maybe 1 more from battle-shock.
  • 30 Arrowboys, with a +1 to hit and the double attack.  They are 6+ to hit against the -2 artefact.  They do… 2 damage versus the 2+, and take 20 MWs for the trouble.   
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for the spam... I'm having a similar conversation on another forum, and we are now thoroughly confused by the rule.

11 hours ago, Rob Hawkins said:


If GW's intention was a single roll to try for a single mortal wound, they could have (and should have) updated the text to "Each time an enemy unit selects this general as the target of any attacks, roll a dice."  But they didn't.  Probably because the trait is utterly worthless if it only has a 1-in-6  chance of dealing a single mortal wound (after the general has already been killed by all those attacks, by the way).
 

Rob, it now occurs to me that there is even a THIRD possible interpretation.  Each attack is a line on the warscroll.  So a unit might have 2 or 3 different attacks (thus your wording about "enemy unit" doesn't work), but each instance of that attack does not trigger Mark.  So a unit of 10 dudes with two different melee attacks each with an attack characteristic of 1 would trigger Mark twice.  As opposed to once, or twenty times.

I'm getting sucked into a black hole of language games...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lemon Knuckles said:

Here’s two quick examples:

  • 30 Vulkite Bezerkers, throwing axe attacks then charge with double hand-axe, re-rolling failed hits.  They will do an average of 6 damage against the 2+, and take 14 mortals back from Mark, and 10 damage from the general’s counter attack.  Halve all of that with their 4+ ward save, and they lose 12 models from damage, plus maybe 1 more from battle-shock.
  • 30 Arrowboys, with a +1 to hit and the double attack.  They are 6+ to hit against the -2 artefact.  They do… 2 damage versus the 2+, and take 20 MWs for the trouble.   

Mark of the Favoured only works in the combat phase, so missile weapons don't get a mortal wound roll.

54 minutes ago, Lemon Knuckles said:

Sorry for the spam... I'm having a similar conversation on another forum, and we are now thoroughly confused by the rule.

Rob, it now occurs to me that there is even a THIRD possible interpretation.  Each attack is a line on the warscroll.  So a unit might have 2 or 3 different attacks (thus your wording about "enemy unit" doesn't work), but each instance of that attack does not trigger Mark.  So a unit of 10 dudes with two different melee attacks each with an attack characteristic of 1 would trigger Mark twice.  As opposed to once, or twenty times.

I'm getting sucked into a black hole of language games...

A unit has to select the target(s) for all of their attacks at the same time, before making any of the attacks.  So it would still be the enemy unit selecting the target with "any" attacks.  But... how about this: 

"Each time an enemy unit is picked to attack in the combat phase, if any of its attacks target this general, roll a dice.  On a 6+ the attacking unit suffers 1 mortal wound after all of its attacks have been resolved."

That way, the criteria is when the unit is picked for attacking, which only happens once (maybe twice if you've got something like Vanhel's on it).  So it's selected for its turn to make attacks attack once, and if any of its attacks target the general, roll one dice to see if the trait is worthless.

But that rule probably won't fit in the available space in the Command Traits callout.  99% of GW's unclear rules probably stem from having trim them down enough to fit the entire rule into fewer than 3 lines of text in a text box. ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...