AoS 2 - Blades of Khorne Discussion

[Xasz]

18 minutes ago, Kaleb Daark said:

Depending on his size, if he’s big then I’d like to convert him with two heads as a mount for my chaos lord arbaal style for a lord on daemonic mount.

and yes... totally agree about tzaangors.

Judging from the video, he seems to be on a base bigger than the other Fleshhounds but smaller than Bloodcrushers.

Which would mean he's on 75 x 42mm.

[kenshin620]

35 minutes ago, Kaleb Daark said:

 

and yes... totally agree about tzaangors.

Well to be fair Tzaangors aren't Mortal, they're Arcanite

I'm pretty sure the Mortal Keyword is 99% Human, 1% Ogroid. And Spawns has that keyword since they can come from humans.

 

So thematically Beasts shouldn't get the Mortal Keyword, they should instead gain the "God Specific non daemon" keywords (Bloodbound, Arcanite, Rotbringer).

Edited November 24, 2018 by kenshin620

[Kaleb Daark]

I was thinking more that tzaangors are a nice god specific beast man aesthetic over and above their mortality per se. 😊

id very much like to see Taurox back in the mix as a character leading either blades or beasts, especially since a certain rat is back now. 

Anyway, here’s looking forward to wrath and rapture and seeing Karen’s rack in the flesh.

[Praecautus]

So Wrath and Rapture has sigmar rules in it, which I would fully expect to include warscrolls. Do we anticipate any changes to khorne scrolls in the box? It could be an opportunity for GW to revisit some of them. Maybe make blood crushers better for example or change how blood letters do MW? Maybe even add some alliegience abilities similar to nurgle? 

I don't recall if blight war changed any scrolls for the included units.

[Bosmer Nightblade]

2 hours ago, Praecautus said:

Do we anticipate any changes to khorne scrolls in the box?

I don't expect any warscroll changes, but i wouldn't be surprised to see a new warscroll battalion.

[Gabester539]

4 hours ago, Praecautus said:

So Wrath and Rapture has sigmar rules in it... or change how blood letters do MW?

I think we might see MW on an unmodified 6 from now on, but hopefully a points decrease too

[mastercrafted]

Didn't blight war introduce the wheel thingy for nurgle? Perhaps something similar will come in this

[kenshin620]

17 minutes ago, Gabester539 said:

I think we might see MW on an unmodified 6 from now on, but hopefully a points decrease too

Bloodletters methinks are fine, even if they're moved to unmodified 6's to wounds. But Bloodcrushers could use some help. Even just one extra attack on their swords would be nice.

I think Karanak might finally get the Hero keyword, but also a point bump. It is a little funny he's cheaper than 5 flesh hounds, which he can summon (well theres a chance he cant summon them but still).

I'm actually curious if Daemonettes would get a price bump. While they're no DoK, 90 Daemonettes are a very effective force.

 

1 minute ago, mastercrafted said:

Didn't blight war introduce the wheel thingy for nurgle? Perhaps something similar will come in this

To be fair Blight War predated the battletome so was a preview of Maggotkin. Not sure if a new army wide Khorne thing would show up. However Slaanesh may get their Battletome preview since currently they only have their Host rules and the Depravity point system.

[Coyote]

3 hours ago, Bosmer Nightblade said:

I don't expect any warscroll changes, but i wouldn't be surprised to see a new warscroll battalion.

It’d be nice to have a FAQ update with the release.  

[Praecautus]

I think Slaanesh will be the winners w the box and get some idea of their abilities. I think we may get a battalion for the units in the box, which could be interesting.

I hope blood cruchers get an update but I am not holding my breath. 

[Aeryenn]

There already has been a confirmation from a GW account that they will make some changes to warscrolls and I believe it was mentioned with bloodcrushers in the question. 

[Agent of Chaos]

Wholeheartedly support Blood Crushers getting a boost to make them worthwhile. As others have said, an extra attack for each rider would probably just about do it (and fit with the fluff of the riders being the best of the best bloodletters). However I really cant understand these calls for Bloodletters to pop mortals on unmodified 6's or even that this change would be OK with some khorne players... (warning: incoming rant)...

A lot of investment has to go into the mortal wound dealing Bloodletter Bomb; The unit itself (320) + Wrath of Khorne Bloodthirster (320) + Bloodstoker (80) + at least one Slaughterpriest with killing frenzy (100) and if you want to keep them in range of the bloodsecrator first turn then you will have dropped another 400 points on 2 more priests and gorepilgrims. And all this for a glass cannon unit which will certainly delete whatever you throw it at first turn but then die to a stiff breeze immediately after.

Currently if you can get 30 into combat (which never happens) with one Killing Frenzy prayer and in range of the bloodsecrator, you can expect 30 mortal wounds from your 60 attacks. Admittedly this is a lot but as stated above, you're only deleting one or two units for an 1100+ point investment that turn, to then lose your 320 point unit in your opponent's turn. If your opponent knows how to screen then the tactic is easily defeated, or at least mitigated. If the bloodletters are outside bloodsecrator range then the mortal wound output is halved.  If you fail killing frenzy, if you can only get 15-20 in melee range, etc etc you get the idea. If the proposed change of unmodified 6's were to come in then the best you could expect from your 1100 + point investment with all 60 attacks (which you will almost never get) is 10 mortal wounds.... and people would be OK with this?!?!?!

The bloodletter bomb is pretty much the only sneaky trick that khorne can play outside of some battalion shenanigans. Yes we can summon which is certainly nice, however its at the expense of our other allegiance abilities which is a limitation not placed on any of the other chaos god abilities (all three can summon separately to their other abilities). Even the cap on 8 tithe points or the fact unspent points are wasted instead of banked is harsh when compared to the others. If anyone is at all familiar with the shenanigans of Daughters of Khaine, Idoneth Deepkin, Nighthaunt, Seraphon, even Sylvaneth with the teleporting between the woods and summoning tree lords, etc then you would know that Bloodletters are absolutely fine as they are!

I realise the game has been moving towards abilities popping on unmodified 6's for many new units (with some old ones being retconned) and this may be why people are anticipating the change. However GW returning to a 2 year old battletome and applying this nerf to bloodletters, without a points decrease or otherwise addressing the limitations of the khorne allegiance ability in comparison to newer armies or other chaos gods, would be brutal.

And yes I do also realise that the bloodletter bomb is part of a wider strategy as it forces your opponent to deal with them allowing you to carry out your next move, however it is a huge points investment as outlined above and so needs to remain a strong damage dealing option in order to remain viable. Otherwise there are much cheaper ways to put a 30 wound screen in your opponent's face turn 1.

So if those saying they would be fine with this change could give it a rest so as not to encourage GW to actually make the change, that would be great.

[kenshin620]

Well I think they will do Unmodified 6's regardless of balance. It's a 2.0 edition change.

Much like "Wholly Within" range for buffs.

 

Will it ruin synergies? Well yes. But GW seems fine with that.

Look at BoC, more specifically Warherd. They have unmodified 6's for Mortal Wounds....which the Doom Bull's Command Ability does nothing for!

[Agent of Chaos]

Beasts of Chaos have a very well fleshed out allegiance ability, in addition to summoning, access to wizards/endless spells for mortal wound damage, ambushing, etc, etc. Far more sneaky shenanigans available to them then Khorne. Besides nobody's Warherd strategy relied on mortal wound output from Bullgors because even with modifiers it was never putting out anywhere near the output of bloodletters so probably not a fair comparison. 

 

[Revan123]

Quote

 

Well I think they will do Unmodified 6's regardless of balance. It's a 2.0 edition change.

Much like "Wholly Within" range for buffs.

 

Funny thing, that only Blightkings would win after that, but everyone else will lose. Daemonettes, Bloodletters, Chaos Chosen, Archaon, Varanguards with daemon blades, Chaos Marauders. And I don't know any faction, who will lose more, than Chaos in that case. 

We already have struggling with lots of things to do our armies competative. And many units depend on boosting of their abilities. Skyfires are dead already becouse of unmodified. 1 shot from each... ONE SHOT! For 200 points.  

And here you have Daughters of Khain with rerollable FNP,  fearless and 120 attacks with potential reroll to wound. We have 40 skeletons with potential 240 attacks. We have ghosts, who don't care about rend and have 4 save unmodified (one time Archaon wasn't able to kill TEN models with all his attacks for TWO phases and you can't counter it at all, saving for mortal wounds spam). We have shooty army and Khorne, Slaanesh and even Nurgle are struggle to get to them and at least TRY to do something. Or Fyreslayers, who have deepstrike and units with 4+ FNP.  

Everyone keep telling me, that Chaos still is able to get on top. But then I look at the Meta of Tournament. Well, in our meta such Chaos armies will be wiped out easily. I tried 4 bloodthirsters a lot in different setups. They don't do that amount of damage for their points and die rather fast. So, letters are still the only option to get competative, but not to get on top, because each shooty army will be almost certain death. 

[Isotop]

On 11/22/2018 at 2:52 PM, Luke1705 said:

Actually I think Darksteve is correct now. The roll itself is stil subject to modification. The rule would have to say “if you roll an unmodified 1” for it to be unstoppable.

Interestingly, the reverse would also be true, where if they ever suffer -1 to wound, those mortals would proc on 1’s and 2’s

How can the "roll itself" be modified after ther attack sequence ended? I think I showed pretty clearly that a rolled 1 ends the attack sequence before modifiers take place.

I would like you to support your claims with the core rules in order to have  a productive discussion on the topic.

@Darksteve, same for you, mate.

I hope this does not sound to harsh - I really do not want offend anyone (really).

[phizzco]

6 hours ago, Isotop said:

How can the "roll itself" be modified after ther attack sequence ended? I think I showed pretty clearly that a rolled 1 ends the attack sequence before modifiers take place.

I would like you to support your claims with the core rules in order to have  a productive discussion on the topic.

@Darksteve, same for you, mate.

I hope this does not sound to harsh - I really do not want offend anyone (really).

Hey I think the main thought behind this is that if you were correct, then there would no point to take a bloodstoker. The whole point in the synergy between them and the skullreapers is to prevent them from killing themselves. You might be right but I think that goes against the intent of the rar.

[Darksteve]

7 hours ago, Isotop said:

How can the "roll itself" be modified after ther attack sequence ended? I think I showed pretty clearly that a rolled 1 ends the attack sequence before modifiers take place.

I would like you to support your claims with the core rules in order to have  a productive discussion on the topic.

@Darksteve, same for you, mate.

I hope this does not sound to harsh - I really do not want offend anyone (really).

Sorry I had thought I made it clear before but I'll try again. The rules you are quoting for the attack sequence ending do not specify that the attack sequence ends before the completion of the step you were in, ie the To Hit or To Wound step,  otherwise models that allow rerolls of 1s would not work at all. 

Edited November 27, 2018 by Darksteve
Spelling

[Luke1705]

7 hours ago, Isotop said:

How can the "roll itself" be modified after ther attack sequence ended? I think I showed pretty clearly that a rolled 1 ends the attack sequence before modifiers take place.

I would like you to support your claims with the core rules in order to have  a productive discussion on the topic.

@Darksteve, same for you, mate.

I hope this does not sound to harsh - I really do not want offend anyone (really).

I’m not sure what you’re arguing. Are you saying that the attack sequence ends as soon as you roll to wound, or that the attack sequence ends for skullreapers if they roll a 1 to wound?

I’m assuming the latter since otherwise modifiers to wound could never exist if it were the former. If the latter, you would have to show rules support for why the attack sequence would end. Take the spirit hosts for example. They clearly denote that the attack sequence ends on a roll of 6 to hit. No such rule exists for the skullreapers. Your assumption is that the sequence ends because no save throw needs to be made. However, that is only because you do not wound on a 1+. This is possible (though unlikely) because unlike in the rules where it is stated that a hit roll of 1 always fails, no such rule exists for wound rolls (unless I missed something in the core rules)

[Retro]

@Luke1705 wound rolls of 1 always fail, it's in there.

That said, nothing in it implies to me that getting the wound roll of 1 results in automatic dismissal of modifiers to determine other effects, it just says they always fail. Not that they always count as a 1.

@Darksteve Bloodstoker would still get a reroll and I don't think he was arguing anything to do with that, just the +1 wound wouldn't negate the skullreaper wounding himself.

[Darksteve]

14 minutes ago, Retro said:

@Luke1705 wound rolls of 1 always fail, it's in there.

That said, nothing in it implies to me that getting the wound roll of 1 results in automatic dismissal of modifiers to determine other effects, it just says they always fail. Not that they always count as a 1.

@Darksteve Bloodstoker would still get a reroll and I don't think he was arguing anything to do with that, just the +1 wound wouldn't negate the skullreaper wounding himself.

If what he was arguing is that the attack sequence immediately ends on a roll of one.  In that case rerolls dont work which is one reason I believe he is mistaken. 

[phizzco]

So all this is saying is that the 1 automatically counts as a miss but it doesnt say anywhere that modifiers can't impact ancillary effects, such as the self dmg.

[Easytyger]

On 11/25/2018 at 7:15 PM, kenshin620 said:

Well I think they will do Unmodified 6's regardless of balance. It's a 2.0 edition change.

Much like "Wholly Within" range for buffs.

 

Will it ruin synergies? Well yes. But GW seems fine with that.

Look at BoC, more specifically Warherd. They have unmodified 6's for Mortal Wounds....which the Doom Bull's Command Ability does nothing for!

There are still several instances of 6+ rolls.  Also I suspect that this is part of Khorne's defining features so this apparent difference from newer warscroll is not by accident.  Rather it is unique to the intended design of Khorne. 

[Kazimer]

So ive made myself a Brass Despoilers sub-list of bulls and bestigors, id like to know if there are any other units than Bloodsecretors, Stokers and Priests that can buff the Beastmen? All the others as far as I recall need Daemons or Mortals.

[Isotop]

3 hours ago, Retro said:

@Luke1705 wound rolls of 1 always fail, it's in there.

That said, nothing in it implies to me that getting the wound roll of 1 results in automatic dismissal of modifiers to determine other effects, it just says they always fail. Not that they always count as a 1.

@Darksteve Bloodstoker would still get a reroll and I don't think he was arguing anything to do with that, just the +1 wound wouldn't negate the skullreaper wounding himself.

Yeah, I never said you can not re-roll when rolling a 1 and the rules do not support this either. Since re-rolls are applied before modifiers and a roll of a 1 lets the roll fail before modifiers you are obviously allowed to re-roll natural 1s. 

Taking the rules reference in the quote above, there are two things that can happen when rolling to wound:

(1) Your roll (after re-rolls and modifiers) equals or beats the To-Wound characteristic of the weapon you are attacking with. You proceed with the save roll.

(2) Your roll (after re-rolls and modifiers) is below the To-Wound characteristic of the weapon. The attack sequence ends.

(3) Your roll is a 1 (after re-rolls) before it gets modified. The attack sequence ends. 

First of all, I hope I did not deduced too much from the rules. If you think so, feel free to tell me what I did wrong. The real question here is: What does "the attack sequence ends" mean? There are two different meanings that would make sense to me:

(4) Finish the step (in this case "2. Wound Roll") you are in right now but do not proceed to the next one

(5) Finish instantly

If (5) was true, there would be no roll to be modified and chaning the rolled 1 to another reuslt would not be possible. If (4) was true, you could indeed stop the Skullreapers from wounding themselves. I think it is pretty obvious that I was implicitly arguing for (5) to be true, but I totally see how others might think of (4) being correct. Two examples of weird results arising from (4) are the following: 

(6) A model with the Sword of Judgement and a +5 To-Hit buff causes mortal wounds on hit-rolls of 1 (5 Warchanters can do this in Ironjaws)

(7) Same for Bloodletters Decapitating Blow (I guess 5 Slaughterpriests could do it?)

In any case, something GW should look into regarding the next big FAQ.