Bloodmaster Deathstar?

[mrstimpson38]

 
Considering that you can chain Bloodletters (Bloodletters, Bloodmasters, Skulltaker, Skullmasters, Bloodthrones, and Skullcannons all have the Bloodletter keyword) attacks back to back so long as you start with your Bloodmasters, how do you guys think a pseudo unit of Bloodmasters would fair on the tabletop? I'm thinking 2-3 accompanied by a Skulltaker, or one of the other non-Bloodmaster options to finish the chain off.
 
I think if you went with the pseudo unit of 3, followed by a Skulltaker, you could do some serious damage and they have a small enough footprint to be able to get attacks in on most serious threats that you would be going after with this type of unit.
 
But to say something against the idea, protecting your finisher may be an issue, so maybe keeping the idea cheeper and only going in with 3-5 Bloodmasters would be a better idea. Or is the whole idea not worth following up on and you may as well just take an extra Bloodthirster? Lots of questions. Maybe take the Bloodmasters and a bunch of units of Bloodletters, and if the opportunity presents itself to chain a couple Bloodmasters into a unit of Bloodletters you could take that into consideration.

[Aspirant Snaeper]

That's an interesting idea that has some merit to it, if only because I don't think it's a rule that's abused often. 

I personally would do 2 Bloodmaster's and horde of Bloodletters and call it at that. Any more and you're significantly hampering your force and focusing them on one gambit that, once that's out in the open, makes it easy for your opponent to whittle you away I think. 

[mrstimpson38]

I agree. Even if you don't go full out with the idea, most mono-Khorne Daemons lists have at least a couple units of Bloodmasters and Bloodletters and keeping the idea in mind while positioning may lead to a couple good uses of this one-two-punch use of the units.

Sent from my Z958 using Tapatalk