Ossiarch Bonereapers Discussion - 3rd edition

[JerekKruger]

My views pretty much line up with most other people here:

Mortis Praetorians: pretty good ability that'll work in any army. Has the advantage of most named characters being in this subfaction.

Petrifex: are you running lots of big boys? Then this is likely the best subfaction for you. Running a few big boys? Might still be a good subfaction. No big boys? Look elsewhere.

Stalliarch Lords: it's a good ability, but it's a let down by only really applying to Kavalos Deathriders, the Liege and Arkhan. If Kavalos were better it might well be great.

Null Myriad: suffer both from being a silver bullet (your opponent is Ironjawz? I guess you get no benefit then) and there being a lot of really nasty spells which don't target your units. Probably the worst subfaction outside of a few matchups.

Ivory Host: the effect is very good if you can retake activate it in a decent strength unit. The question is whether you can manage that. There doesn't seem to be an invite way to do so.

Crematorians: seems okay actually. Also a very cool theme. Not sure if better than Praetorians for a non-big boy army.

[Flippy]

6 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

I always kind of dislike self-hurting to trigger these kinds of abilities, but I suppose it is an option to just lob a Burning Head into your Stalkers or something. Still, all this work for an offensive buff in the same order of magnitude as +1 to hit... You can already buff stack effortlessly in OBR. It feels like just hitting the opponent with that Burning Head instead might be the better use of the spell.

It is usually treated as an equivalent of +1 to hit, but it’s not - not really. Unlike the +1 to hit, exploding hits stack, so with OBR you can easily reach the statistical effect of 1+ (everything hits) by combining both effects. Now, if you add another exploding number (5), you get even more hits. Moreover, the exploding hits offer crazy spike potential if you roll well.

There is a reason why the only other source of this effect is the Empower Nadirite Weapons spell.

Stalkers (all blades) with +1 to hit and this effect will score 14 hits on average.

[Flippy]

Double post

Edited April 18, 2023 by Flippy

[LeftFistofNagash]

I think MP, PE, IH and crematorians all have play in this book, the other two I don’t see a reason to take unless like ppl have said you are in a heavy magic meta

[rattila]

Well i dont know. Mortis Praetorian have a strong potential but you need to build the list around to make the most of it (morghast, kavalos), have good dice on the charge, and be really cunning for it to have a good effect.

petrifex elite is obviously strong but you cant play morteks and kavalos if you want to have the most of it. And it does not work versus weapons with a damage value of 1 or mortals so some armies can counter you.

Stalliarch lords works only for kavalos. And you can have the same bonus for 1 CP. And we have a lot of CP.

Ivory host is not easy to be triggered and depends on dices.

Crematorian is useful whatever you take, its just a nice bonus to have. If you want to make the most of it go heavy mortek, boneshaper, harvesters; but its useful no matter what. Except vs magic heavy or shooting heavy lists… 

Null myriad does not seem to have a lot of love but i do think its more useful than a lot of people think it is. Mostly, its just because the other option can not be useful , on this regard then « dispelling » on a 2+ is useful. I mean, you can save your « normal dispelling » for the spell which reinforce the ennemy units or mess with your game without targeting a specific unit, and then shrugging of all the arcane bolt and debuffs on a 2+. Of course if you play null myriad you will have several mortisan, so you might have more « normal dispelling » than spells that the ennemy can cast. But then if they cast an arcane Bolt or a debuff, you will have 2 chances to dispell it (one « normal » and one on a 2+). Overall this subfaction ability needed to work vs spells and prayers, vs Endless spells and invocation. Then it would have been really interesting.

 

In the end, i feel like all subfaction abilities, on a combined arms army, offer some smalls bonus. Everything is kinda good (except stalliarch, yes). And two of the subfaction (petrifex and crematorian) are really good if you build your army around it. But if you just play what you have not competitively, then all subfaction can bring you something, on an equal measure (again, not stalliarch lords).

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

8 minutes ago, rattila said:

Well i dont know. Mortis Praetorian have a strong potential but you need to build the list around to make the most of it (morghast, kavalos), have good dice on the charge, and be really cunning for it to have a good effect.

Personally, I rate Mortis Praetorians highly even just for its potential to turn on Zandtos. That guy is ridiculous: Huge damage output and a +1 to wound aura you get to use for free. In my opinion, that's a huge upgrade over getting your +1 to wound from the Soulmason or Ossifector. And you can counter charge with him, too, so that's already a use case for the allegiance ability. I feel this guy can easily go into any type of list and be useful.

Not sure if he is overall better than just going Crematorians, though. Those mortal wounds add up.

[Flippy]

1 hour ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

That guy is ridiculous

Agreed. Under his own aura and the one from Katakros, the damage that he can inflict on the charge is terrific.

[JerekKruger]

Update on my Ossiarch buying: I bid on the Battleforce box on eBay, but it ended up going above the other where I rated it as better value than the Vanguard, so I picked up the Vanguard instead. Also picked up a Boneshaper, Soulmason, and two boxes of Immortis Guard. I had ordered a Liege Kavalos too, but hit a message from the shop telling me it was actually out of stock, so will have to wait on that.

Not sure whether to build Immortis Guard or Stalkers. I had originally thought that Stalkers were obviously better, but I'm starting to come round to Immortis now.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

18 minutes ago, JerekKruger said:

Not sure whether to build Immortis Guard or Stalkers. I had originally thought that Stalkers were obviously better, but I'm starting to come round to Immortis now.

You can always do a kitbash version of Immortis with swords or Stalkers with shields and just run them as whatever.

Edited April 19, 2023 by Neil Arthur Hotep

[anorek]

1 hour ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

You can always do a kitbash version of Immortis with swords or Stalkers with shields and just run them as whatever.

Speaking of kitbash, anyone managed to magnetize them or make a different action pose?

[Field907]

I feel really silly for asking this, but I’m having a hard time understanding how the Mortek Crawler actually shoots. It has three ranged weapons but the rule says to pick one profile each time it shoots. Does this mean it fires three times (once for each weapon) but you get to choose which profile for every attack? Or do you get one attack with each profile?

[Volkhov]

9 minutes ago, Field907 said:

I feel really silly for asking this, but I’m having a hard time understanding how the Mortek Crawler actually shoots. It has three ranged weapons but the rule says to pick one profile each time it shoots. Does this mean it fires three times (once for each weapon) but you get to choose which profile for every attack? Or do you get one attack with each profile?

You pick the profile you want to use that turn, and attack with that profile equal to the number of attacks in its characteristic as you would a normal weapon. 

[Field907]

39 minutes ago, Volkhov said:

You pick the profile you want to use that turn, and attack with that profile equal to the number of attacks in its characteristic as you would a normal weapon. 

Thanks, that’s what I thought. Deathly Barrage was throwing me off because I’ve never considered splitting shooting attacks from a single weapon before, I totally forgot you could even do that. 

[chosen_of_khaine]

Has anyone done the mathhammer on when it is more beneficial to use +1 save via All-Out Defense vs. +1 to wards via Impenetrable Ranks?

[Sception]

not really much math needed.  from 6+ to 2+ each +1 to a save is better than the one before, so all out defense is better unless at one or more of the following applies:

1. you already used all out defense this phase

2. your armor save is already going to be 2+ without using all out defense

3. you are taking mortal wounds in the same phase

4. you have enough other penalties to save and/or bonuses to ward that your death ward is equal to your armor save before using one of these commands

 

i mean, you could do math to determine the exact ratio of mortal to regular wounds needed for the ward boost to be better at each armor save value, but that feels like a lot of work for not a lot of marginal utility.

[RocketPropelledGrenade]

Have now played two games against Bonereapers, one with. Both games against were Petrifex, I played as Mortis (mostly because I haven't finished all the Immortis I want to field in my Petrifex list). I like both subfactions. The counter charge was very useful, even against an older-style KO list that wasn't focused on assault boats, and the Petrifex bonus was a really powerful one to see in action. The game where I played against Petrifex as S2D was a blowout for the other guy-- I got all my charges off into a double turn, only finished off a single unit fully. Then he regen'd the majority of his reinforced Immortis block holding the center line and just rended my 3+ saves to oblivion.

I maintain the book has some potent weaknesses and a few design issues, but there is definitely some real strength in it. Also confident Battleplans are going to matter a lot, as I predicted. One of the reasons the S2D matchup went so bad is the objective setup in In the Presence of Idols made a slugfest in the middle pretty necessary, while my game against KO would have gone a lot worse in Position Over Power if my friend had been focusing even a little bit on the flank objectives (he's not a super experienced player, although he is learning).

[Tizianolol]

Guys I have a question about harverster.  When a model with more then one melee weapon fight like a block of 20 mortek, the model has to do every single attack with his weapons before i can try to use my harvester ability? Or I can try to roll after every single weapon attack? Thx a lot:)

Edited May 4, 2023 by Tizianolol

[Sception]

either?  or, it ahouldn't matter, really?  whether they roll all their attacks at once or one at a time, either way once you know how many wounds and or mortal wounds are dealt, those wounds and mortal wounds are applied one at a time, per core rule 14.1 & 14.2.

So lets say, after all of the enemy's attacks, they deal 14 wounds to your mortek guard.  You roll their ward save and get 2 6s, negatinf two of those wounds, leaving you with 12 wounds to allocate, one at a time.  Let's say 3 of your mortek guard are in range of a harvester.  you apply one wound to one of those three.  It only has a wounds characteristic of 1, so it is slain and removed.  the harvester's special rule kicks in, you roll a 5, and choose for the harvester to return a slain model to the mortek unit, putting it in the same place as the model you just removed.

then you apply the next wound to the unit, to the same model you just returned, slaying it again.  it is again within harvester range, so you roll for the harvester again and this time you roll a 2.  the harvester's ability fails and no model is restored to the unit, leaving only two models in range of the harvester, and 10 wounds left to apply.

the next two harvester rolls succeed, but the two after that both fail.  now there are no more models left in the unit within range of the harvester's ability, so the remaining 6 wounds are applied normally.  in the end you lost 9 morteks, instead of the 12 you would have lost without the harvester, but if you had kept more of the unit in range you probably would have lost fewer.  positioning harvesters is very important.

thankfully the new book gives the harvester's ability a larger range, so it's easier to keep more morteks in range, but watch out for situations that might separate your morteks & harvesters, like tricky charges or impassible terrain.

 

saving time:  there are a couple common practices with harvesters to save time without changing the effect.  the first is to roll for the harvester before removing the slain model, and just leave it there if you successfully replace it.  the one time you might not want to do this is if you're not worried about running out of models in range, and putting the returned model somewhere else offers a tactical advantage - more models in range of an objective, or bringing another unit into combat to restrict its movement next turn, etc.

the second time saving method is to make harvester rolls in batches, but you must be careful when doing so to never make more harvester rolls at one time than the mortek unit has elligible models in range of the harvester's ability, and to only remove casualties after each batch from within that range.  as shown in the example above, you can hit an unlucky streak and lose all the models in range before you've run out of wounds to allocate, and if you make harvester rolls when no models would be in range, that's cheating.

Also, remember to roll for enemy models in range as well, as your harvester can turn them into more morteks too.  The harvester can also use casualties, friendly or enemy, to heal itself.

It's a very complicated unit.

[Sception]

So how much longer do you all think we'll need to wait for the faq?  The duration on Zandtos's buff needs errata, and Mir Kainan's spell is probably getting some, and I don't think too much more is likely, but I also don't want to get overly invested in any particular unit or build until it's passed the initial faq because you just never know.

[RocketPropelledGrenade]

1 hour ago, Sception said:

So how much longer do you all think we'll need to wait for the faq?  The duration on Zandtos's buff needs errata, and Mir Kainan's spell is probably getting some, and I don't think too much more is likely, but I also don't want to get overly invested in any particular unit or build until it's passed the initial faq because you just never know.

There's some similar thoughts I've been thinking about a few Soulblight things, so I really hope the next batch of FAQs comes soon.

[The Red King]

Quick question about Arkhan the blacks spell range buff. Does it turn soul release into an 18" bubble of no deepstrike?

[Sception]

best guess is no, aura spells centered on the caster like that are usually considered to be range zero / target the caster, and rhe effect area is not considered a spell range.  but it's never very clear and faq could say otherwise.

[Fellman]

1000p redy for a game on sunday

[Grimoriano]

On 5/17/2023 at 10:42 PM, The Red King said:

Quick question about Arkhan the blacks spell range buff. Does it turn soul release into an 18" bubble of no deepstrike?

I think yes, the spell says the 12"... the range of this spell must be... and Arkhan increase the spell range so...

[JerekKruger]

On 5/17/2023 at 9:42 PM, The Red King said:

Quick question about Arkhan the blacks spell range buff. Does it turn soul release into an 18" bubble of no deepstrike?

As written it's ambiguous I'd say. Spells usually start "...is a spell that has a casting value of X and a range of Y".", and in Soul Release's case it didn't include the range part, suggesting it has range 0 i.e. it can only target the caster. However it later says "The range of this spell must be measured from the caster..." and, by using the term range, it there's a spanner in the works.

As written, from a strictly rules lawyer point of view, I'd currently say yes, his ability does increase the area of effect to 18". However I suspect the Rules as Intended interpretation is that it shouldn't. Despite the wording, I think 12" is meant to be the range of the effect, not the range of the spell, and it's expect an FAQ to clarify this eventually (probably one of GW's patented super annoying yes/no answers).

If I were using Arkhan I wouldn't try to increase the range myself, if my opponent was using him and tried to increase it is say that I don't think that's how it's supposed to work, but if they insisted I wouldn't argue the toss.