Tomb Kings?!!

[Cargo Cult]

On 5/23/2018 at 7:33 AM, Screwface said:

You liked the bone giant? I thought that was a terrible model. Looked like an oversized skeletal Carmen Miranda.

I’m not letting that pass. Boo hiss!

[Undeadly]

16 hours ago, Ashtyn said:

To be honest, I'd love Settra to come back and add a 2nd family to the death faction. 

A death faction that doesnt belong to Nagash but is out to try and destroy him. Would fit with Settra's comments at the end of the end times and would allow all the light magic the TK used to use to come back into the army and add some flavor to it. 

Yeah, but that completely undermines the whole point of Death as its own independent GA. Its not like Sigmar and order, because not every one is a Stormcast. But with Nagash, he is the God of Death and master of the Realm of Death. I'd have no problems with Settra coming back under Order, or even Destruction, but putting a anti-death faction in Death is a bit silly.

[Sception]

Yeah, a death subfaction that hated & feuded with some other subfactions could work (say a khalida-led faction that hated vampires), even an unruly and only semi reliable undead faction could work (see the flesh eaters and their mad progenitor who Nagash can only control oart of the time), but an undead faction that was just flat out anru nagash would just undermine the entire point of grand alliance death.

You could concievably have an anti-nagash undead subfaction.  Heck, the Stormcasts are that already.  But, like the Stormcasts, such a subfaction wouldn't be part of grand alliance death.

[Skreech Verminking]

Why not, wouldn’t it be somehow funny and interesting to have a anti death, death army instead of always Sigmarines being an anti army against all factions?

[Sception]

Because the thematic point of the grand alluances is that they're loosely alinged with each other, and in particular will fight together against the other alliances, and the mechanical point of the alliances is that they can be fielded together via the grand alliance allegiance rules.  If you have a faction more likely to ally with others against nagash than vice versa, then that simply isnt a death alliance army.

Death alliance doesn't mean undead.  Flesh eaters arent undead, but they're death alliance.  Stormcast are more or less undead, but they're not death alliance.  Death alliance doesnt even mean 'from shyish'.  There are chaos and order groups trying to carve out territory there, and thete have been fluff references the to flaming skeletons from the realm of fire.

Death Alliance means 'loosely aligned with nagash against sigmar's alliance, the dark gods, and the muscleanious barbarian tribes of destruction.'

Edit:  haga, typo magic.  'Muscleaneous', best description of the destruction alliance ever.

[Nevar]

Sception has it right.

The alliances are literally what they are called, allies.  While they can fight among themselves and even scheme against one another (Morathi) every member of each alliance at the end of the day will side with the other factions of that alliance when push comes to shove.

If there was a Settra led faction that despised Nagash and fought against his minions anywhere they found them... then they would not be 'allied' to Death.  They would be directly opposed.  If Settra was going to be in any of the alliances he would be in Order as a character much like Morathi who plays nice with the Sigmarite pantheon but has their own agendas.

He could potentially also fit into Destruction as a super neutral force... but I couldn't see him siding with Orruks and Ogres when all the cards are on the table.  He would be more like the Eldar directing orks and other brutes where he needs them through guile... even then though... push comes to shove Settra would side with Order I think.

[themortalgod]

17 hours ago, Nevar said:

Sception has it right.

The alliances are literally what they are called, allies.  While they can fight among themselves and even scheme against one another (Morathi) every member of each alliance at the end of the day will side with the other factions of that alliance when push comes to shove.

If there was a Settra led faction that despised Nagash and fought against his minions anywhere they found them... then they would not be 'allied' to Death.  They would be directly opposed.  If Settra was going to be in any of the alliances he would be in Order as a character much like Morathi who plays nice with the Sigmarite pantheon but has their own agendas.

He could potentially also fit into Destruction as a super neutral force... but I couldn't see him siding with Orruks and Ogres when all the cards are on the table.  He would be more like the Eldar directing orks and other brutes where he needs them through guile... even then though... push comes to shove Settra would side with Order I think.

The only exception being if Nagash demands Settra serve him or be destroyed (as he did before), thus leading to Settra perhaps saying "yes" this time with the intention of destroying Nagash from within. aka the enemy pretending to be an ally or the enemy forced to serve due to no alternative.


 

[EccentricCircle]

Given that Nagash is reported to be able to take control of any undead creature I think there might be potential for an army which unwillingly serves him. I do like the idea of tomb kings plotting behind his back, aware that at any moment the puppet-master might take control of their actions and make them do unspeakable things while the scream a silent scream from inside their mummified minds.

In fact, aren't mummies brains kept in canopic jars? Maybe they could find their souls trapped inside a jar of black realmstone whenever Nagash sends their skeletal legions off to do his dirty work. Then its only when he is looking the other way that they "wake up" and look upon his works in despair.

Edit: ok, turns out the brain wasn't kept during the mummification process, but I still kind of like the idea.

[Nevar]

5 hours ago, themortalgod said:

The only exception being if Nagash demands Settra serve him or be destroyed (as he did before), thus leading to Settra perhaps saying "yes" this time with the intention of destroying Nagash from within. aka the enemy pretending to be an ally or the enemy forced to serve due to no alternative.


 

Yes but... Settra would have to rise again before that could take place, and from what I understand is Nagash always comes running to absorb new gods of the Dead anytime they pop up.  I can't see why Nagash would even give Settra a second chance in that scenario, especially if Settra was a new fledgling death god.  If some other 'Tomb King' type death god was appearing and that new baby god was bringing back the Tomb Kings, wouldn't he just get nom nom'd by Nagash before he could even accomplish much?

I know they can make whatever concessions they wanted and retcon that it happened when Nagash was wrecked by Archeon, but that is partially the point.  There is no real natural way to give rise after the fact to the Tomb Kings without it being somewhere else.  TBH raising up a bunch of dead warriors who hate Nagash seems like the machinations of Sigmar more than anyone else, and would he raise a soul like Settra into a new faction or would he just reforge him into a fancy Stormcast?

[Sception]

Settra working for nagash at all would be a pretty big betrayal of his character.  I could see Khalida being best buds with Neferata before that*.  There are other possible leaders of a revived tomb king faction - Khalida & Arkhan spring to mind.  If it were done via expanding deathrattle instead of making a whole separate faction, then even Krell or Tamra could work.

Settra was a cool character, but also one extremely grounded in his specific place in the old world.  I don't really see much of a place for him in the new one, where his kingdom is gone, his legions are gone, his mortuary cult is gone.  I don't see him starting from scratch, taking the time to gather new mortal followers to eventually become undead followers to eventually become just a rehash version of nehekhara.  I just don't see it.

[Deathmaster Snikch]

I really hope Tomb Kings are still usable in matched play in the new edition. My favourite army, would be a huge shame if they got removed from the game.

 

id love for them to return but right now I jsut want them to stay usable 

[themortalgod]

18 minutes ago, Deathmaster Snikch said:

I really hope Tomb Kings are still usable in matched play in the new edition. My favourite army, would be a huge shame if they got removed from the game.

 

id love for them to return but right now I jsut want them to stay usable 

Unfortunately, its almost certain that TKs will be dropped from matched play now. Like Dark Elves, as soon as they get their "legends" release, their rules will no longer have matched play points associated with them. I also suspect that the "legends" rules will also be mothballed once they are released. I wouldn't expect any of them to ever be updated again. 

The only way our beloved TKs have a future is if they get brought into AoS proper like GW has done with Free Peoples (unlikely) or if they get re-created in AoS. (also unlikely but a man can dream)

That said, I suspect the existing compendium rules can be considered usable in 2.0 until they are deprecated with the legends release. (though you could use them indefinitely so long as your opponent is cool with it)

Also, one glimmer of hope to keep in mind is that now that Tyler Mengel (author of the "unnoficial tomb kings battletome") is doing so much work directly with/for GW, I am sure he is whispering in ears to try to convince them to bring TKs back. No one is a bigger TK proponent than Mengel and it is a source of hope that he is on the inside. 

 

 

[Deathmaster Snikch]

20 minutes ago, themortalgod said:

Unfortunately, its almost certain that TKs will be dropped from matched play now. Like Dark Elves, as soon as they get their "legends" release, their rules will no longer have matched play points associated with them. I also suspect that the "legends" rules will also be mothballed once they are released. I wouldn't expect any of them to ever be updated again. 

The only way our beloved TKs have a future is if they get brought into AoS proper like GW has done with Free Peoples (unlikely) or if they get re-created in AoS. (also unlikely but a man can dream)

That said, I suspect the existing compendium rules can be considered usable in 2.0 until they are deprecated with the legends release. (though you could use them indefinitely so long as your opponent is cool with it)

Also, one glimmer of hope to keep in mind is that now that Tyler Mengel (author of the "unnoficial tomb kings battletome") is doing so much work directly with/for GW, I am sure he is whispering in ears to try to convince them to bring TKs back. No one is a bigger TK proponent than Mengel and it is a source of hope that he is on the inside. 

 

 

Yeah I'm aware of him, he's doing some really cool things 

 

The Dark Elf thing is a bit different as all of those models are still usable in matched play, they just count as something else now. The reality is we have no idea if they'll be removing their points from matched play as the legacy warscrolls for dark elves were so greatly exaggerated on how amazing they are it's kind of a redundant point. Time will tell but that doesn't really tell us much 

[Sception]

I'm also hopeful that, after tomb kings get their legends treatment, Mengel will work on a 2nd edition of his homebrew TK book, adding points back into it.  Won't be official event legal, but any casual format that cyrrently allows his existing homebrew tk book should be cool with it.