General Lumineth Realm Lords Rules Discussion

[Joseph Mackay]

44 minutes ago, BadDice0809 said:

I mean... yeah? I dont know how that is up for contention, or relevant to my point. 

The point is something DOESN'T need to be the MOST NPE thing for it be (1) NPE and/or (2) get the nerf bat (see Savage Strike, Pertifex).

Why does GW nerf some things and let others slide? Who knows (even though the fact that the Savage Strike change and Pertifex changes were single lines in subfactions, and not combos of Subfaction AND artifact AND Battalion AND specific units is probably a factor).

The mere fact there is this much conversation over this is still pretty telling, as are the same sort of arguments that have popped up on either side.

GW nerfs things based on power more than anything. Savage Strike may have been a ‘NPE’ for some people, but it was nerfed 100% because of the power - in the Fec players turn, they got to attack you 4 times before you got to pick a single unit, usually with Ghoul King on Terrorghiests (Savage Strike general + Feeding Frenzy, second unit + Feeding Frenzy. because at the time Savage Strike happened before either player picks a unit to fight with so didn’t count as an ‘activation’)

Petrifex Elite were too strong with the +1 save and +1 rend? Making Mortek Guard way too good defensively AND offensively at the same time while also being undercosted (the Hekatos thing meaning they don’t need heroes babysitting them like other death armies do, I strongly believe Bonereapers aren’t paying for that ability)

[Rachmani]

I too think it‘s not a healthy discussion, even though I could maybe even should be had.

LRL suffer from a rather big second release (even though their first one clearly had things missing) combined with a lot of warscroll rules, which makes them seem special. On top of that, be it coincidence or not, their lore and stories paint them in an even brighter picture. Pun intended. 

And all that during a time where many of us can‘t play as much as they‘d like to. 

The timing for this discussion seems rather poor. Even if it‘s a matter that‘s on many people‘s minds. (Or some loud few, I dunno, I don‘t follow it that much).

[Aelfric]

13 minutes ago, Joseph Mackay said:

These thread should be locked honestly. It does no good whatsoever. It’s purely a thread specifically for people to complain about Lumineth, and anyone who tries to defend them against the hyperbole and exaggerated nonsense going on in here is personally attacked with insults 

It serves as an outlet for people to discuss any issues they may have with LRL.  This thread was specifically set up for this purpose and to free up the Rumour Thread, which was being filled with people's concerns.  If you close the thread, it won't stop the discussion; it will simply spread to other threads.  I feel it is better to give a space for this discussion, rather than trying to supress it.  It is simply encumbent on us all to ensure the debate is kept civil and without rancour.  I am collecting Lumineth, but I don't want to put my fingers in my ears and go la-la-la.

[Feii]

1 hour ago, BadDice0809 said:

I remember a lot of similar discussions like this surrounding OBR, really just Pertifex, when they were first revealed.

Same cries of broken! Not fair! Destroys balance! Mortek are unkillable!

Same cries from OBR of 'just play around them' and 'its their mechanic they can have nice things.' 

Similar outrage about FEC savage strike always fighting first.

Then, after the world's largest AoS tournament ever, the highest ranking OBR player (2nd) didn't take any Mortek. And there were all of what, 3? OBR in the top tables?

Yet, even though it wasn't crushing all tournaments, GW nerfed Pertifex into the ground (also hit down Savage Strike). The negative reaction from the community was enough. A similar story happened with Slaanesh (even though they were undoubtedly much MUCH better than OBR ever were).

What can we take from this? An interaction doesn't have to be ruling the top tables for it be NPE, and GW have nerfed these sort of interactions before. Also that "just play around it" is a bull**** excuse/justification.

Right now, a LOT of the LRL defenders in this thread sound exactly like the early OBR defenders, trying to explain away others legitimate concerns with the way the army operates.

When it comes to OBR this is a very good point because nerfing Petrifex meant the internal balance of the book got much better, at the  same time Syar nation has 60ish % winrate and Ymetrica aroound 30%. It needs to be said that I would love for cowmen to be more playable and competitive because I truly believe the stone temple is one of the few nice and interactive factions in LRL. 

[yukishiro1]

13 minutes ago, Joseph Mackay said:

These thread should be locked honestly. It does no good whatsoever. It’s purely a thread specifically for people to complain about Lumineth, and anyone who tries to defend them against the hyperbole and exaggerated nonsense going on in here is personally attacked with insults 

If that's how you feel, just don't participate? In the same way that not everything that is NPE to one person is NPE to another, you don't need to enjoy reading every thread here. If you feel like it's just a bunch of people complaining, rather than calling for the mods to lock it down, wouldn't it be better just to direct your attention elsewhere? Even if it really is just people complaining, there is value to that if it gives people a way to vent and then calm down. Ironically, this thread was created precisely because people didn't like people talking about LRL rules in other threads, so a specific thread was made so you wouldn't have to read it elsewhere. 

It's depressing to me to see how a significant minority (on both sides of the debate) seem more interested in shutting down the comments of people they disagree with - whether by hurling insults or calling for mod intervention - than just not rising to whatever they see as the bait. That's a self-fulfilling prophecy - of course you aren't going to be able to have a useful discussion when people come at it from that angle. 

I mean, I get it, we all get annoyed when we think Someone on the Internet is Wrong (TM), but people should really be stepping back before they get to the point of either insulting others or trying to get the thread locked. 

 

[Indecisive]

I don't even see how the windarchers are all that imposing, all they've got is speed and some pile-in shenanigans.
They don't pack much of a punch for their cost and are very squishy. The models look too big for W2 Sv5+

[yukishiro1]

13 minutes ago, Indecisive said:

I don't even see how the windarchers are all that imposing, all they've got is speed and some pile-in shenanigans.
They don't pack much of a punch for their cost and are very squishy. The models look too big for W2 Sv5+

6" pile-out (which you get in the battalion even if you don't charge) is extremely powerful against combat armies. They'll get shot to pieces by any ranged damage, but lots of armies don't have ranged damage. This is the sort of design - a unit that is extremely strong against melee, but extremely weak against ranged damage - that tends to produce frustrating outcomes for players, especially when shooting is so strong already. 

I don't think they're actually all that big a deal myself, just pointing out that I can see why some people are looking at them and feeling like they're not going to enjoy playing against them. 

Personally, I'd much rather face some rooriders than sentinels that MW snipe your heroes from anywhere on the board, so I'm not really bothered by them. 

 

[Indecisive]

Yeah, I was going to compare them against sentinels.
Sentinels seem way more obnoxious, with their no LoS 30'' mortal wounds.

[BadDice0809]

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

I would wait  a bit to make a final judgement (and share it as a fact in this  forum) before having played some games. Because even if your examples are fine, it happened a lot of times that people freak out about overpowered warscrolls, NPE mechanics and horrible rules for armies  before they were released  and turned to be "just OK" after some games.

I mean, I have played plenty of games against Teclis, Total Eclipse, and Sentinels 360 no scoping support heroes. Pretty sure others have too. And you don't need to play 100 games to see an spell that turns off CA, in an army with an autocaster, to see how this can be a frustrating experience.  

51 minutes ago, Joseph Mackay said:

GW nerfs things based on power more than anything. Savage Strike may have been a ‘NPE’ for some people, but it was nerfed 100% because of the power - in the Fec players turn, they got to attack you 4 times before you got to pick a single unit, usually with Ghoul King on Terrorghiests (Savage Strike general + Feeding Frenzy, second unit + Feeding Frenzy. because at the time Savage Strike happened before either player picks a unit to fight with so didn’t count as an ‘activation’)

Petrifex Elite were too strong with the +1 save and +1 rend? Making Mortek Guard way too good defensively AND offensively at the same time while also being undercosted (the Hekatos thing meaning they don’t need heroes babysitting them like other death armies do, I strongly believe Bonereapers aren’t paying for that ability)

If GW nerfs on solely "power" then why isn't Fyreslayer LotL w/ Hearthguard gone, or Ziflin/WLV/one drop gone? Or Eternal Conflagration Changehost? I mean, the specific FEC interaction you are quoting can still happen in the game right now, as long as it is the FEC player's turn and the Savage Strike guy charged. You just have to have the CP (easy; buy one in your list, get one from your first turn). Further, while OBR do not need heroes to activate their built in CA, any OBR list without heroes (and thus a source of RDP to fuel their CAs) is absolutely dead in the water. There were many complaints about OBR, their RDP system as a replacement for CP (especially since they lose any ability to use things like reroll charge, on demand reroll 1s, or any realm specific abilities) certainly wasn't the loudest. The answer is GW doesn't nerf solely on power.

34 minutes ago, yukishiro1 said:

If that's how you feel, just don't participate? In the same way that not everything that is NPE to one person is NPE to another, you don't need to enjoy reading every thread here. If you feel like it's just a bunch of people complaining, rather than calling for the mods to lock it down, wouldn't it be better just to direct your attention elsewhere? Even if it really is just people complaining, there is value to that if it gives people a way to vent and then calm down. Ironically, this thread was created precisely because people didn't like people talking about LRL rules in other threads, so a specific thread was made so you wouldn't have to read it elsewhere. 

It's depressing to me to see how a significant minority (on both sides of the debate) seem more interested in shutting down the comments of people they disagree with - whether by hurling insults or calling for mod intervention - than just not rising to whatever they see as the bait.

 

This. 

31 minutes ago, Indecisive said:

I don't even see how the windarchers are all that imposing, all they've got is speed and some pile-in shenanigans.
They don't pack much of a punch for their cost and are very squishy. The models look too big for W2 Sv5+

I am also scratching my head as to why these huge, armored Kangaroos somehow have less armor than a Warden, and not at least 3 wounds. Also why a random Warden Champion sword has better rend than a Bladelord's sword. I kinda feel like the whole Bladelord "Perfect Strike/Flurry of Blows" idea was someone's darling they could not bear to kill, so they created this weird disjunction within the unit to keep that specific interaction (Sunmetal Greatsword that doesn't have rend, Sunmetal Greatsword without the actual Sunmetal ability).

[yukishiro1]

Yeah, the Bladelord warscroll doesn't seem to really make any sense within the army. I can't imagine why anyone would ever take them for anything other than a "looks cool" reason (and honestly, I'm not sure they really do - they are weirdly static, the models don't convey much sense of motion the way that, say, Namarti Thralls do). I mean the Stoneguard aren't great either, but at least they have a theoretical role in the army; Bladelords seem to have none. They don't do anything well, except maybe chop up chaff if you and your opponent don't either fall asleep or turn over the table in frustration trying to count how many junk attacks they get. 

Edited March 27, 2021 by yukishiro1

[LuminethMage]

7 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

I don't think sniping with one another about who's lying about what is very useful for anybody. 

What really strikes me about this book is how much it feels like it was written by someone who just really likes High Elves, rather than by someone who cares about balance. It's just chock full of extra special rules that feel more like they're in there because it's cool than because they really thought through how to design an army. I think we all have to admit at this point that we were just wrong about the first half of LRL - this wasn't some carefully designed book with one big weakness (being bad at playing the mission), it was half of a book that has no real weaknesses, and it only looked like there was a choice to make them bad at the mission because we only had half the book. Stuff like giving Teclis autocasting teleports, or giving units 6" flying pile-outs in a battalion even if they didn't charge, speaks of a design philosophy that is not about building a balanced faction with interesting tradeoffs, it's just about throwing literally everything you can think of into the book because they're High Elves, they should be powerful and elite and cool! 

You could be right in terms of power level. But, I’d wait to see some actual lists. I agree the Lumineth have a lot of tools now - but it still might be hard to put everything into a list (which would be good). That’s again - generally speaking, not you - something I feel is a bit overblown, you won’t see Teclis, 40 Seninels, Severith, 20 Chargers and Avalenor in one list. 

The problem might actually be that some units aren’t good enough (Bladelords, Ballista) and in the end you’ll still see pretty much the same list as now, but that might be solved with point updates though in the future. 

A casual player has much more options though, and could make playing against the Lumineth more fun in the end for most people. It’s easier to build average lists now. 

Edited March 28, 2021 by LuminethMage

[yukishiro1]

They shouldn't have given Teclis access to the wind or earth spells IMO. That would make the faction a lot more interesting, then you would actually have to choose what you wanted in a list, not just get itall on a wizard who literally autocasts everything and knows 20+ spells. 

Edited March 28, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Saturmorn Carvilli]

As I mentioned in the OP, I don't have much to add to this discussion despite starting the thread.  I haven't had the opportunity to play my Lumineth yet.  Honestly, I haven't even really thought all that much about them as I think its still a while off before I can field them.  It's that reason I haven't really done a whole painting on them either.  Well that, and I have a bunch of older armies I've trying to get caught up too.

I'm stepping in concerning the meta of the discussion.  For the most part, I think the thread has been fairly civil.  I have read each post and gave each all the consideration I think they deserve.  As a fan and player of the Lumineth, I am very interested in what others have to say.  Particularly, those that aren't fans of the Lumineth rules.  I believe a person doesn't learn or grow only speaking with others that agree with them, or at very least, those that disagree and hold their tongue.

I want to read about the concerns (I'd take it as a kindness if they were delivered in a friendly, polite and honest way) others may have.  I am under no obligation to agree with them. Just like they are not any obligation to conform to my thoughts on the subject.  It's fine to disagree.  I also welcome supporters of the Lumineth rules to also speak their view in a friendly, polite and honest manner. 

We all know it's early days for the Lumineth.  A faction that has grown quite fast and in an environment where few games actually get played.  Add to that, the faction is evidently the 'spiritual successor' to a polarizing faction from all the way back of the WHFB days.  A faction that the game designers appear to want to take in a different direction as to what has be considered to succeed at winning games.  A faction with a 'hole heapin' helpin' of rules many of which really haven't explored (to my knowledge anyways).

 

Me, I like the idea of the Lumineth have piles of rules as a flavor win.  The Lumineth are often described as doing things in an overly complicated manner often in an attempt to seem intellectually superior.  I personally like to think of this as a sort of Rube Goldberg thinking that while it works has a number of extraneous things not really adding much.  I can definitely see how that can be concerning. 

The Lumineth oddly could involve both players having a steep learning curve when in comes to playing or playing against the Lumineth.  All these piles of rules acting like a vast unlabeled control panel several buttons, dials and switches where it will be difficult to know exactly which to activate (or deactivate them on the opponent's end).  However, could be very rewarding once a Lumineth player gets the hang of, and likely equally rewarding when an opponent of a Lumineth army learns the counters.  It could be a struggle in the learning process which I suppose could be considered a NPE.

I am still planning on sticking with a Ymetrica Alarith type army.  I just think those models are neat.  As 40k Primaris space marine player, I do not want a repeat of practically every part of the Internet feeling like, "Oh, you're one THOSE players", which often can bleed over in real space leading to some cold introductions between me and players I haven't met before.  I field armies I like the look of more than what happens to be the best or best combination.    To be sure, I don't throw a random bunch of units together and ensure my army covers the elements I think they game wants where I can.  Although, I'm going to take the model I like more for that role over the one that is better for that role. I just want a fun game for me and my opponent.  While the objective the game is to win, the point is to have fun.  I can have fun losing just as easily as I can have misery winning.

 

TL;DR: I think this thread has been quite informative.  I also think it is good to have a single place where those that want to discuss Lumineth rules good or bad can openly.  Rather than all over the place in threads they really don't have any business being in.  I fully understood starting this thread in a more general area over the Lumineth specific was likely to see more criticism.  I think that's good.  While I have no interest in spending my free time in a hate cell, I also don't fancy spending that much in an echo chamber either. 

Be polite and honest, please.  And because this AoS and not 40k, try to keep an open mind (despite it being "like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.")

[Icarion]

1 hour ago, yukishiro1 said:

They shouldn't have given Teclis access to the wind or earth spells IMO. That would make the faction a lot more interesting, then you would actually have to choose what you wanted in a list, not just get itall on a wizard who literally autocasts everything and knows 20+ spells. 

From a lore and gameplay standpoint, I think it is very on brand for Teclis to know all the spell lores, but I agree giving him the choice in game to choose from all of them at once is both overbearing, and a huge time sink as players will like have to take time to decide which spell seems best to cast from moment to moment.

I think a better option to fix this would be to give teclis access to all the spell lores, but make him chose his 4 spells before the game like any other wizard. Makes people commit to a strategy, but keeps the allure of being the "mage god"

[yukishiro1]

I don't really like that option because it still lets Teclis pick all the best spells and still means that every spell has to be created with the knowledge that it can be autocast. Like that teleport spell might actually be interesting if it was limited to only the wind mages, and it would be a reason you might want to actually bring one...but the fact that Teclis can autocast it turns it into a balance nightmare, as well as making it much less likely you'd take the windmage. 

I mean don't get me wrong, it'd be better than the status quo. I just think there's more design room opened up if you don't have one model that autocasts everything. 

[Chaos Shepard]

I will be honest and state that I am coming from a place of mostly ignorance. I do not collect nor have I had the chance to play a game against Lumineth. That said I cant be the only person that has a problem with this am I.

Maybe I am being petty, but I have never seen this used before. In both Sigmar and 40k if a model has to be placed but can't be placed it counts as having been slain. Its like the rules writers are trying to pick a fight.

[Beliman]

9 hours ago, BadDice0809 said:

I mean, I have played plenty of games against Teclis, Total Eclipse, and Sentinels 360 no scoping support heroes. Pretty sure others have too. And you don't need to play 100 games to see an spell that turns off CA, in an army with an autocaster, to see how this can be a frustrating experience.  

I was talking about new mechanics from their second wave, as everybody in this thread is talking about. I completely agree that Total Eclipse with Teclis is NPE, and Sentinels are not fun to play against. But I'm not sure that rooriders are in the same level, nor lorekeeper are worst (to put some examples). Maybe, after some games, we find that they are not as toxic as we thought?

Btw, I will play a game today, give me luck!

Edited March 28, 2021 by Beliman

[The World Tree]

2 hours ago, Chaos Shepard said:

I will be honest and state that I am coming from a place of mostly ignorance. I do not collect nor have I had the chance to play a game against Lumineth. That said I cant be the only person that has a problem with this am I.

Maybe I am being petty, but I have never seen this used before. In both Sigmar and 40k if a model has to be placed but can't be placed it counts as having been slain. Its like the rules writers are trying to pick a fight.

It is a bit weird, but has almost no effect. Victory points so rarely factor into the game.

[Aelfric]

2 hours ago, Chaos Shepard said:

I will be honest and state that I am coming from a place of mostly ignorance. I do not collect nor have I had the chance to play a game against Lumineth. That said I cant be the only person that has a problem with this am I.

Maybe I am being petty, but I have never seen this used before. In both Sigmar and 40k if a model has to be placed but can't be placed it counts as having been slain. Its like the rules writers are trying to pick a fight.

I think this is a sign of future-proofing for AOS 3.0.  Perhaps the number of slain models will have more significance.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

 

11 hours ago, Beliman said:

About NPE, I agree with you, but I can't take seriously an argument that use NPE as something to take in consideration without having played any game (that's the whole point of NPE).

 

10 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

6" pile-out (which you get in the battalion even if you don't charge) is extremely powerful against combat armies. They'll get shot to pieces by any ranged damage, but lots of armies don't have ranged damage. This is the sort of design - a unit that is extremely strong against melee, but extremely weak against ranged damage - that tends to produce frustrating outcomes for players, especially when shooting is so strong already. 

 

Both of these points relate to an observation I would like to add to this thread.

Many people in this thread have been talking about NPE and using the term as shorthand for "anything that a play does not like". While some things that happen in AoS certainly don't feel fun if you are on the receiving end of them, I don't think using "NPE" in this broad of a way is conducive to the discussion. Sure, nobody likes to lose, but we can all recognize that losing still has to be part of the game. More than that: We would probably not want to play this game if nobody could ever lose.

Instead, I think it's better think about NPE in terms of interactivity and decision making. If a mechanic makes you feel bored, frustrated or upset because it makes you feel like your choices and actions during the game (or even during list bulding) are not meaningful, that's the type of neagtive experience we should be concerned about. Because that undermines the reason why we play the game in the first place: To make interesting and meaningful tactical and strategic choices.

And with that in mind, it makes sense to talk about the negative play experiences that new mechanics will likely cause, even if we do not yet have first hand experience with them. Talking about NPE in that context should be read as concern that a new mechanic will reduce interactivity, invalidate decision making or prevent you from playing the game that you originally came to the table for.

As a second part to this post, I think that AoS currently has a problem where if an army is good at shooting or magic, the basic mechanics of those phases make it so that the opponent gets to participate less in the shooting and magic game. This is especially true for magic, where being able to cast many spells stuff at a high cast bonus usually conicides with the ability to prevent your opponent from casting spells. In other words, if your list is good at magic, it makes your opponent bad at it. That's why many people feel the rational choices during list building when it comes to magic right now are to either make sure you can dominate the magic phase or to forego magic all together (except for maybe one wizard to unbind endless spells). The same is true to a degree for shooting.

It's noteworthy that the combat phase does not have the same problem. If you are weaker in melee than your opponent, this does not usually mean that you don't get to meaningfully participate in the combat phase. It just means that your opponent has an advantage. I think this is why people complain less even about very strong melee armies. Certain mechanics exist that invalidate melee armies, as well, such as fight first/fight last, and those are fairly universally agreed to be instances of NPE as well. It remains to be seen now how the new pile in shennenigans of Slaanesh and LRL turn out in this regard. They are my primary concerns right now, because it seems to me that they have a high potential to prevent melee armies from playing, but they seem like they require a higher skill level to let a player actually do this. Since I am mainly concerned with NPE in casual settings, they may actually turn out to be mostly OK because of this.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

30 minutes ago, Aelfric said:

I think this is a sign of future-proofing for AOS 3.0.  Perhaps the number of slain models will have more significance.

I actually think it's just a flavour thing. The sister teleports herself and the brother out to heal him. Why should they count as slain if they can't return to battle because of that? That would be literally the opposite of what the fluff say is happening.

Mechanically, it's very unimpactful, anyway. How often will there be literally no place on the board to put down one small hero model?

[Feii]

4 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

I actually think it's just a flavour thing. The sister teleports herself and the brother out to heal him. Why should they count as slain if they can't return to battle because of that? That would be literally the opposite of what the fluff say is happening.

Mechanically, it's very unimpactful, anyway. How often will there be literally no place on the board to put down one small hero model?

because everything else functions like that? (even in 40k) Seriously the designers need to STOP introducing one ofs to this game it makes it super confusing.  

Hagg nar new Faq where you get 5 DPR against everything BUT MW, then this etc. 

[whispersofblood]

@Neil Arthur Hotep thank you, after reading the past days responses I was coming to say something largely the same. The lack of precision makes the conversation frustrating and pointless. 

We eventually reached a workable definition for what NPE could be objectively. And, you've described it well.

To address the subjectivity point quickly. Like all things we can name NPE is objective is is a thing. Your experience is subjective and a situation could stir inside you feelings similar even exactly like the feelings that NPE might produce. That does not make the cause of those feelings NPE. 

Neither I or anyone can tell you what you felt was right or wrong. I can only say if the cause fits the definition. For example; many things burn which aren't fire. You have a limited number of ways of experiencing the world so many things feel the same.

Which is why in the very same NPE video on Warhammer Weekly, Tom said most of what is called NPE can actually just be addressed with knowledge. I would further define that as preparedness, temperance and expectation.

I'd like to push back against the combat isn't an NPE a bit to further prove the point of subjectivity. Most of the time when we experience crushing combats we call the unit delivering it OP, rather than NPE. We say its too strong for its points. I would argue that most of not all the combat units that people could name as strong contain some if not all the attributes of NPE in the definition. 

The difference is that a) GW has conditioned the player base to experimence combat as an exchange and b) it carries an illusion of risk

Usually what happens with these units is the points go up until they are basically untakable by virtue of limiting the army too much. Or they get a new book and most of the structure is removed. Take for example the KoS. Anyone who has ever used one can tell you they spoke very high. Their normal dmg is quite ok tbh. What made them the combat terror if the Summer of 2019 was Thermalrider, Locus (,Hunter supreme) and being replaceable. What they became was a piece that did what the player asked 9/10 and the 10th time you could replace it anyway. Near combat certainty, in a lowish drop book, in a meta with no tangible shooting.

The demand was increase the points, or descriptions of events which could mean OP. The truth was that it was Thermalrider Cloak that needed to be removed. The combat stats on a KoS are exactly the same as they were, Locus doesn't help much, and it can't use it's command ability on itself.  It is now considered rubbish. I think this is what frustrates so many excited players, OP and Rubbish are in the same spectrum and most people only vocalize on one end. Which is disingenuous and terrifying for players on the recording end.

I would argue the only thing that keeps the Mawcrusher out of obvious NPE is the size of its base which limits it's ability. The game is full of combat NPE hidden behind a shared expectation and nebulous definition.

[Joseph Mackay]

I’m seeing a lot of people taking issue with Teclis autocasting spells, which brings me to Nagash: although he doesn’t ‘autocast’ he does have enough buffs that he mostly can’t fail and/or you can’t stop his spells. Why does nobody take issue with him? it’s because of a bias against Aelves that a lot of people seem to have lately

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

5 minutes ago, Joseph Mackay said:

I’m seeing a lot of people taking issue with Teclis autocasting spells, which brings me to Nagash: although he doesn’t ‘autocast’ he does have enough buffs that he mostly can’t fail and/or you can’t stop his spells. Why does nobody take issue with him? it’s because of a bias against Aelves that a lot of people seem to have lately

When LoN was dominant, people had huge issues with Nagash. He's just currently overcosted (850 points, 930 with spell portal) to the point of uselessness in both of the faction he can be played in, so he's not as visible. He also had various other nerfs. If Nagash + 80 Skeletons was still a viable playstyle, you would see the same complaints. People definitely still complain about Nagash if you bring him (not unjustified, imo) even though he's not part of the best LoN or OBR lists.