AoS 2 - Hedonites of Slaanesh Discussion

[Enoby]

2 minutes ago, shinros said:

Have GW just set us up for future releases? He's called the Lord of Gluttony, future character/unit expansions based on the sins of Slaanesh? 

I'd love if that was the case. Hopefully, if this release does well, they'll continue to expand on Slaanesh.

[shinros]

8 minutes ago, Enoby said:

I'd love if that was the case. Hopefully, if this release does well, they'll continue to expand on Slaanesh.

Indeed! I do think the line will be rather popular considering the reactions to all the models. 

[Austin]

Well I was wrong! And glad to be!

[shinros]

Seems we have halflings now. I think the blissbrew homunculus is also a halfling possibly. 

 

Edited January 1, 2021 by shinros

[Klamm]

Wow, looks great. That would take me two years.

A bit of a pity it's a named character, it means all the big mortal heroes (Glutos, Sigvald) are unique. It's an issue the Nurgle range has as well.

But still, a great centrepiece. The elite Painbringer guy with the barded sword is amazing, I bet people will proxy him as a Lord of Pain. 

[Malakithe]

Maybe there will be a generic character version but likely not. Also I want those mutated rat ogre type guys as their own unit.

[Overread]

We still have two generic keepers (regular plastic and forgeworld exalted) which don't have specific names. One bonus of big things like that being character models is it does limited them to just the one - and that's a huge model akin to the other big centre-piece models we've seen GW keen on pushing out as of late. It certainly seems to be their new trick now that endless spells and terrain are out in the open for most factions. 

[Golub87]

The introduction of specific type of excess that is not sex bodes well for the future of Slaanesh.

Happy New Year to everyone indeed!

[Enoby]

Glutos being a sorcerer is interesting; I wonder of where he'll be on the magic "tier" list; e.g. what if any bonuses he'll get to casting. 

[Silphid]

I think expecting different centerpieces based on other depraved angles is just wishlisting. We have received a great offering of new models, we won’t see more for years as the focus goes to other armies.

This centerpiece model is intimidating to paint, but very impressive. Although it is obviously unique, It won’t stop me from converting to whichever angle of depravity I chose, give it a new name and use it’s rules to represent my own theme. Yes it remains unique in your army, but let’s be honest it’s so much work (and probably 400+ points) that you wouldn’t want two anyway...

[Adammck66]

I want to convert the guy ontop to have Guy Fieiris head

[Carnith]

OH LAWD HE COMING. 

While I am slightly disappointed at our 5th named character for the army and with lack of generics Hedonite Specific heroes, he looks really good. I'm really looking forward to what our army does in terms of rules. Like, with this big a release, I'd hope for two weeks of preview articles. Lore could easily be 2 days worth. Who is the Lord of Gluttony? What has Sigvald been up to? Whats the protean form of Slaanesh? How do Hedonites heirarchy work?

Art is one day.

But then once we get into mechanics, the changes from what was before to what it will be. That's what I'm curious about. Are we still 3 separate factions into one? Will god seekers still seek out the trapped Slaanesh? Or are they seeking their way to the Protean form? Are Pretenders still ignorant of the protean form and do not accept that as Slaanesh? Invaders seem to not care one way or the other. 

Then we will have 9 warscrolls to tease rules for, 10 if the Lord of Pains rules were just hold overs. So Maybe an article or two to go over mortals and any changes to daemons. 

I would expect a day for Sigvald, cause it's Sigvald.  

Like, they can easily push articles for days on Slaanesh. I would hate for like one article. I kinda want it spread out. Build up the hype. 

[Chumphammer]

7 hours ago, Enoby said:

Really interested to see what this guy does...

I hereby Dub thee the "WankWagon"

[AngryPanda]

10 hours ago, shinros said:

Seems we have halflings now. I think the blissbrew homunculus is also a halfling possibly. 

 

The model is absolutely fantastic, it’s filled with incredible detail, depth, and character. This is one of those models that will take me at least a month to paint because of how much is on it. However, I’m not gonna hide that I also couldn’t help laugh at the BDSM halfling; it’s a nice touch but it’s pretty enjoyable to think that the first halfling we’ve been introduced to in AoS is wearing skin-tight black spandex across his body and face. 

Edited January 1, 2021 by AngryPanda

[Benkei]

I'm 99.9% sure this model will have an entire page of rules to depict the "aides" in the same vein that the Silent King and the Triumph of St Katherine

[RocketPropelledGrenade]

10 hours ago, shinros said:

Have GW just set us up for future releases? He's called the Lord of Gluttony, future character/unit expansions based on the sins of Slaanesh? 

I'd be surprised if that was the direction they were taking. I think it's just a title to express how the character's devotion to Slaanesh plays out. After all, Lord of Pain doesn't work that way, and Sigvald is called "the Magnificent," not "Lord of Vainglory" or "Lord of Pride."

Basically, I wouldn't read too much into it the title.

[Aelfric]

I'm pretty sure his middle name is Maximus.

[Austin]

I am really thinking about buying the palanquin and using it for other models...

The armored guy would make a cool Lord of Pain, and the two....things....would be great as Slaanesh Spawn.

[Enoby]

1 hour ago, Austin said:

I am really thinking about buying the palanquin and using it for other models...

The armored guy would make a cool Lord of Pain, and the two....things....would be great as Slaanesh Spawn.

Yeah, I totally get that. Tbh, if the price isn't ridiculous then it would make a good warshrine + lord of pain + shardspeaker (peacock lady). If the model is the same price range as Katakros (I doubt it but I can dream) then it might end up being a saving. 

[CeleFAZE]

With the spectrum of changes we've seen in other books, I'm wondering if we'll end up actually keeping our exploding 6's or not once the new tome is out. We're kind of unique in regards to daemons at the moment, where our locus isn't really a buff from daemon heroes as much as a debuff to enemy units, and I wonder if they'll be changing our locus effect to instead enable euphoric killers on our daemon units.

It would strictly be a nerf, and I'd hate to see it happen, but with the multitude of kneejerk rebalancing we've experienced since the last book I'm bracing for something like that. I'd really love to see at least some kind of rules reveal to go with all the new model previews; this dripfeed approach is pretty agonizing.

Edited January 4, 2021 by CeleFAZE
reformatted due to weird censoring

[Enoby]

12 hours ago, CeleFAZE said:

With the spectrum of changes we've seen in other books, I'm wondering if we'll end up actually keeping our exploding 6's or not once the new tome is out. We're kind of unique in regards to daemons at the moment, where our locus isn't really a buff from daemon heroes as much as a debuff to enemy units, and I wonder if they'll be changing our locus effect to instead enable euphoric killers on our daemon units.

It would strictly be a nerf, and I'd hate to see it happen, but with the multitude of kneejerk rebalancing we've experienced since the last book I'm bracing for something like that. I'd really love to see at least some kind of rules reveal to go with all the new model previews; this dripfeed approach is pretty agonizing.

This is my worry too - exploding 6s is the one part of our allegiance ability I like as is (though maybe they could add it to shooting too). It ties the allegiance together with BoC and Slaves to Darkness additions, which other battletomes can lack when they're too keyword dependant.

My biggest fear for this battletome is that our allegiance abilities become Syberite and Daemon only, leaving BoC and StD extras serving no purpose in our army.

[zombiepiratexxx]

I held off on the Shadow and Pain box, I'm kind of glad I did even if it'll take a while before the Lord of Pain becomes available as a separate kit. But all the new mortal stuff will very much be making a part of my pile of shame! 

[Lucentia]

The exploding 6s is the main part of the current allegiance abilities I'd expect to go untouched really, it's a simple rule that applies easily across the board and is suitably thematic.  The locus and depravity rules are where I'd imagine major changes will occur (whether that's replacing them wholesale or reworking them to fit better with the new mortal/demon split I couldn't guess.  Certainly if they stay as they are now it's going to reduce the value of all these nice, new non-hero, non-battleline units.)

[Carnith]

So theory crafting a change to depravity, which would obviously come in the form of a fundamental change to some things in the army. I'll also preface this by saying I dislike the hero hammer nature our book pushes us too with 6 heroes and min battleline. Hero heavy should be acceptable, or 3-4 minor heroes with lots of units too. I would see depravity be something like blood tithe but different. 

So my idea is this. 

Slaanesh armies gain depravity in the following way. When a slaanesh hero/monster/unit takes damage but isn't wiped out or when a Slaanesh hero/monster/unit attacks a unit and isn't wiped out, depravity is gained. Depravity may only be gained per unit once per phase.

Depravity would build up for army buffs or can be spent on summoning. This doesn't exhaust the pool of depravity. I'm thinking greater daemons always generate depravity when they attack, or something about killing enemy heroes generating a depravity on their death, and same with out heroes. For the last clause, you can't take 20 archers and split them for attack two units and gain two depravity for wounding two units, likewise 40 marauders getting attacked multiple times would yield you multiple depravity, but could survive maybe multiple rounds to gain depravity. 

Thoughts? 

[Enoby]

24 minutes ago, Carnith said:

So theory crafting a change to depravity, which would obviously come in the form of a fundamental change to some things in the army. I'll also preface this by saying I dislike the hero hammer nature our book pushes us too with 6 heroes and min battleline. Hero heavy should be acceptable, or 3-4 minor heroes with lots of units too. I would see depravity be something like blood tithe but different. 

So my idea is this. 

Slaanesh armies gain depravity in the following way. When a slaanesh hero/monster/unit takes damage but isn't wiped out or when a Slaanesh hero/monster/unit attacks a unit and isn't wiped out, depravity is gained. Depravity may only be gained per unit once per phase.

Depravity would build up for army buffs or can be spent on summoning. This doesn't exhaust the pool of depravity. I'm thinking greater daemons always generate depravity when they attack, or something about killing enemy heroes generating a depravity on their death, and same with out heroes. For the last clause, you can't take 20 archers and split them for attack two units and gain two depravity for wounding two units, likewise 40 marauders getting attacked multiple times would yield you multiple depravity, but could survive maybe multiple rounds to gain depravity. 

Thoughts? 

I'd like this option, especially the idea that depravity can bring about other buffs. I'd actually quite like it if it worked like DoK (passive buffs building), but more extreme and with debuffs after a certain level to give a harder choice with summoning. So for example, an army wide +1 to hit, but -1 to save at X-Y depravity would make use choose whether we want the power vs the summoning and debuff. I think, in Slaanesh style, the buffs should increase offensive power/speed and reduce defensive power. It would be really difficult to balance as you wouldn't want the debuffs to be too harsh or to be inconsequential, but it could be very interesting. 

Not needing 20 dice to count depravity would be nice too

Only issue you might have with your suggestion is it might 'feel bad' to kill an opponent's unit. Rules-wise it's not an issue, but people may not like it if they feel they've lost something for doing "too well".