Bloodsecrator Stacking

[thundering]

Just for my own edification; does the effect of the banner stack? What I mean more particularly is, is there any clause in the rules that would prevent them from stacking? And is there any official ruling from Games Workshop on the stance?

Were people able to stack Bloodsecrators at places like Adepticon, or when playing in a Warhammer World event?

[Oppenheimer]

The new Khorne book reworded it so it shouldn't stack. It used to before that book came out.

Mind you the rewording leaves room for interpretation because GW is ass at clear wording. But, the fact that they changed the wording at all hints at their intent.

[Killax]

44 minutes ago, thundering said:

Just for my own edification; does the effect of the banner stack?

What I mean more particularly is, is there any clause in the rules that would prevent them from stacking?

And is there any official ruling from Games Workshop on the stance?

Were people able to stack Bloodsecrators at places like Adepticon, or when playing in a Warhammer World event?

- Because it doesn't say otherwise we are left to assume it stacks.
- As you adress in your second question, there isn't any clause that would prevent them from stacking on the Warscroll itself.
-There is no current FAQ on Rage of Khorne.
- House-rules sometimes rule that same named abilities do not stack, such as SCGT House-rules. Last Adepticon it did stack. Last Warhammer World event it did stack.

Ask your TO or local player group for the set confirmation. As said, RAW does not prevent it from stacking.

23 minutes ago, Oppenheimer said:

But, the fact that they changed the wording at all hints at their intent.

Unfortunatly this is not the case at all. Last example, GW's initial Mighty Lord of Khorne said it could dispel as if it where a Wizard. Then the GW FAQ mentioned that it could attempt to unbind ad nauseum. Current wording states it can only unbind once.

There is no clear intent to stop it as rules as written do not prevent stacking  Unlike, for example, the 28 other not-stackable abilities found on Khorne models. 

[Arkiham]

Waiting on faq. Roll a dice.

This has been  discussed an always ends up in a argument 

[Killax]

Just now, Arkiham said:

Waiting on faq. Roll a dice.

This has been  discussed an always ends up in a argument 

It's even possible that they left it intentionally vague, this way you create rage, the rage of khorne  

[AlphaKennyThing]

It's still vague as hell. One time I read and I think it's clearly that it doesn't stack, and then I read it again and question my initial interpretation.

My advice, accordingly, is this:

If you plan your entire army based around stacking Rage of Khorne and then it gets FAQ'd, you've potentially wasted a lot of time and paint. If your genuine reason for taking 2-3 Bloodsecrators is to give battlefield-wide coverage of Rage of Khorne, with any overlaps being a cheeky bonus, then you'll be at no loss.

[Killax]

@AlphaKennyThing the honest thruth of the matter is that stacking them in the first place often requires 3 Bloodsecrators anyway. There is a lot of confusion revolving around this model, reading it's rules is the number 1 thing players seem to skip.
- Example: You need to announce you 'plant the banner', this does not happen every Hero phase once you have used it.
- Example: You cannot move after the banner is planted. No movement, none, no abilities pushing you, nothing.

Last but not least it's a 120 points for a guy that does nothing unless he actually stops moving. Somehow it seems that players have gotten it into their mind that Rage of Khorne is a permanent aura he's taking with him, this is not the case either  

As Arkiham said, the topic only leads to discussions. The thing is, if you objectively judge how Khorne is designed the only 'very powerful' effect is Rage of Khorne. Khorne brings a Bloodsecrator and poweful Melee Infantry, that's honestly all there is to the whole faction. As a result I am fairly certain it's design is made so that you can technically stack it because stacking it in itself requires quite the investment and feat.

[AlphaKennyThing]

@Killax you're absolutely right in that most players seem to forget he can't move if he wants to bring the pain. I have a Blades of Khorne/Slaves to Darkness mixed army, and although the Bloodsecrator has been a massive help at times, it's often been at a critical juncture in the battle that I've been forced to either move him to support a unit out of range in the following turn, or go firm to keep the buff up. I've not gone and invested in a second one, because I'm all about cavalry (Ruinbringer Warband, ho!) and he's blaaaaady slow. Any turn he's not planted he's just 120pts of uselessness plodding across the board.

If I had two, or even three, I'd like to think it stacks, but I can't see how it'd be a frequent occurrence unless you use them very tactically. They're quite susceptible to a good sniping, mind.

[fredster4050]

Or run Gore Pilgrims twice....

[Killax]

10 hours ago, AlphaKennyThing said:

@Killax you're absolutely right in that most players seem to forget he can't move if he wants to bring the pain. I have a Blades of Khorne/Slaves to Darkness mixed army, and although the Bloodsecrator has been a massive help at times, it's often been at a critical juncture in the battle that I've been forced to either move him to support a unit out of range in the following turn, or go firm to keep the buff up. I've not gone and invested in a second one, because I'm all about cavalry (Ruinbringer Warband, ho!) and he's blaaaaady slow. Any turn he's not planted he's just 120pts of uselessness plodding across the board.

If I had two, or even three, I'd like to think it stacks, but I can't see how it'd be a frequent occurrence unless you use them very tactically. They're quite susceptible to a good sniping, mind.

It's the in-game practice of the model and results of Khorne that confirm that the model it self isn't even the on the top 5 of 'overpowered' models. By large again because the fast mayority that comes chiming in about this ability don't even play Khorne not actually read the Warscroll and go by some heresay, heresay that has it's roots in SCGT House-rules where same name abilities never stack.

In most cases I use 2, one to open initially and the second to move and follow up the turn after that. A good opponent knows they are the linchpin of Khorne armies, because they are. As you said they are not exceptionally difficult to beat nor are they exceptionally good.
The fact remains that ability is reworded and not in the restrictive sence. In another topic revolving around this same subject we can find enough examples in Blades of Khorne who work with clearly restricted abilities.
- One more, once, one additional in the  mayority of cases refers to a 'restricted ability'.
- Add 1, add 3, substract 1, substract 3 in the mauority of cases refers to a 'cumulative ability'.

 

31 minutes ago, fredster4050 said:

Or run Gore Pilgrims twice....

Then what? 4 Slaughterpriests and 2 Bloodsecrators, doing exactly what?
I guess next biggest misconception is that the Slaughterpriest are actually fantastic... You pay an additional 80 points to make 100 point guys work that don't work by themselves otherwise. The moment you leave them behind for Bloodsecrators they won't Blood Boil or Blood Bind.

As before, if you like running Slaughterpriests (which is mostly a visual preferance) Gore Pilgrims is great. Same applies to many more Battalions. But the honest thruth of the matter is that Slaughterpriests are far from what you can consider the top of the competative game. Sounds harsh maby but it is what it is. We are working with 50% chance of succesion, 50% chance of failure, 17% chance of inflicting D3 wounds on our own model. This is really not by any stretch of the game 'top competative'.

If you really want to have a competative top Khorne army you focus on Infantry Units, not Heroes. This is because the Bloodsecrator is the only model that actually gives Khorne armies a competative edge when used in conjunction with large numbers of Infantry that will hopefully cross the board against tons of Missle attacks.

[thundering]

In re-reading the arguments, and the warscroll, and the FAQs, I can understand now how they stack. Moreover, I had some friends in attendance at Adepticon, wherein it was allowed to stack. I can assume at Warhammer World and so forth, it'd be similar.

The distinguishing factor seems to be the difference between the articles "a" and "this". Meaning "within range of a banner" only checks to see if the condition of 1+ banners is met, whereas "in range of this model" is specifically referring to the model itself.

Also, I'll caution all you fine folks who refer to the 'updated' wording that seems to simply be book-keeping: GW's official FAQ states that you may use whatever officially published Warscroll you like, even if a newer/more updated Warscroll is available. While it might be more convenient for you to use a newer one, it isn't mandatory. So you can simply elect to use the Warscroll from the starter, which is very cut and dry.

[Jharen]

This is just going to require an FAQ to resolve ultimately.  The wording is poor.  I could care less if it stacks or not, it just needs better wording either way.

 

16 minutes ago, thundering said:

Also, I'll caution all you fine folks who refer to the 'updated' wording that seems to simply be book-keeping: GW's official FAQ states that you may use whatever officially published Warscroll you like, even if a newer/more updated Warscroll is available. While it might be more convenient for you to use a newer one, it isn't mandatory. So you can simply elect to use the Warscroll from the starter, which is very cut and dry.

While this is true, GW has gradually made it more and more impractical to follow this 'suggestion'.  Increasingly we are seeing drastic changes to warscrolls which alter the entire balance of power between specific units.  A prime example of this is the Mighty Lord of Khorne and Slaughterpriest.  The old warscrolls allow them to unbind an unlimited amount of times, which the FAQ further backs up.  Their new warscrolls now limit them to 1 unbind per turn.  Despite this change, their point cost was not altered.  So in this situation, and following the logic of the FAQ to use which warscroll we want, why would anyone ever choose to use the newer ones when the older ones are clearly just better?  So while, yes, we can pick and choose according to the FAQ, the community at large is often just going to rule that you need to use the latest warscroll, especially where tournaments are involved.

[Killax]

@Jharen it gets even more bizare if we follow down that road.
There are Warscrolls of Bloodbound models who don't have the Bloodbound keyword.


In addition to that, a mix of old and new would even be prefered! Why? Because of Command Ability re-wording. As the old Command Abilities from Bloodbound Warscrolls refered to it only being able to use if they are the General. The newer Command Abilities all do not state that. 
Old:

New:
https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-aspiringdeathbringer-goreaxe-en.pdf
If anything I'd say use newer Warscrolls... 

Keep in mind that even the new re-worded Rage of Khorne does not state it wouldn't be able to stack. 

What is stated here is to add 1 to the Attacks characteristic of all melee weapons used by units affected by the Rage of Khorne.
1. It does not state, This ability affects all Khorne units in your army within 18" of this model at the start of the combat phase once.
2. It does not state, you add one more Attack to the Attack characteristic.
3. It does not state, -used by units affected by the Rage of Khorne once.

If Games Workshop wanted it to not stack they "somehow" skipped on 3 instances to do it compaired to their regular wording. What is vague to me is as to why players assumed GW would drastically change this. The Bloodsecrator is the prime reason as to why even veteran Khorne players pick up the starter box again and again. From that selling standpoint changing a key model to not work well would be simply said stupid.

[KnightFire]

50 minutes ago, Killax said:

In addition to that, a mix of old and new would even be prefered! Why? Because of Command Ability re-wording. As the old Command Abilities from Bloodbound Warscrolls refered to it only being able to use if they are the General. The newer Command Abilities all do not state that. 


If Games Workshop wanted it to not stack they "somehow" skipped on 3 instances to do it compaired to their regular wording. What is vague to me is as to why players assumed GW would drastically change this. The Bloodsecrator is the prime reason as to why even veteran Khorne players pick up the starter box again and again. From that selling standpoint changing a key model to not work well would be simply said stupid.

The core rules though still state that only your general can use a command ability. The rewording doesn't allow all models to use their command abilities even if not the general under normal circumstances. What it does do though is remove a slight and un-necessary conflict in situations such as when Archaon uses his command ability (allowing other models with command abilities to use theirs, but under the old wording, then having them fizzle because the model wasn't the general). 

Why players assumed GW wanted to change it that way? - because they told the playtesters that was why they were making the change, and because they had several tournaments at WHW (and elsewhere) where they had gathered data about how it works. 

[Killax]

21 minutes ago, KnightFire said:

The core rules though still state that only your general can use a command ability. The rewording doesn't allow all models to use their command abilities even if not the general under normal circumstances. What it does do though is remove a slight and un-necessary conflict in situations such as when Archaon uses his command ability (allowing other models with command abilities to use theirs, but under the old wording, then having them fizzle because the model wasn't the general). 

Why players assumed GW wanted to change it that way? - because they told the playtesters that was why they were making the change, and because they had several tournaments at WHW (and elsewhere) where they had gathered data about how it works. 

Im obviously aware of how Command Abilities work the point is that the old wording wouldnt have allowed for the Blood Tithe ability to be used.

As the old wording was an actual additional restriction.

There is not a single shred of concrete evidence that GW officially wanted to remove the stacking from occurring. As even on Warhammer Live it was played with stacking options.

In many cases playtesters suggest alterations that dont come to paper. Meaning old ideas are not RAW.

[Chaotic Neutral]

22 hours ago, thundering said:

Just for my own edification; does the effect of the banner stack? What I mean more particularly is, is there any clause in the rules that would prevent them from stacking? And is there any official ruling from Games Workshop on the stance?

Were people able to stack Bloodsecrators at places like Adepticon, or when playing in a Warhammer World event?

no it does not stack.

are you under the effect?  yes/no.

[Killax]

1 hour ago, Chaotic Neutral said:

no it does not stack.

are you under the effect?  yes/no.

And continue reading  ...

Step 1. Are you under the effect at the start of the combat phase Khorne unit? yes/no
Step 2. Add 1 attack to the Attack char. <- cumulative
Step 3. No battleshock tests Khorne unit? yes/no

[Chaotic Neutral]

33 minutes ago, Killax said:

And continue reading  ...

Step 1. Are you under the effect at the start of the combat phase Khorne unit? yes/no
Step 2. Add 1 attack to the Attack char. <- cumulative
Step 3. No battleshock tests Khorne unit? yes/no

it does not stack.

start of the combat phase.

bloodsecrator #1 is within 18" of your guys.  are they currently under the effect of rage of khorne?  no.  add 1 to attacks characteristic.

bloodsecrator #2 is within 18" of your guys.  are they currently under the effect of rage of khorne?  yes (see above). do not add 1 to attacks characteristic.

RIF.  Reading Is Fundamental.

 

[Killax]

3 minutes ago, Chaotic Neutral said:

 

bloodsecrator #2 is within 18" of your guys.  are they currently under the effect of rage of khorne?  yes (see above). do not add 1 to attacks characteristic.

 

Doesnt say it doesnt stack, making it stack. RIF, your reading stuff that isnt written. Nowhere does the ability state you can be affected once.

[Chaotic Neutral]

you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.

[Killax]

1 minute ago, Chaotic Neutral said:

you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.

Feel free to quote sentence that it can only be affected once. 

RIF

[Arkiham]

2 minutes ago, Chaotic Neutral said:

you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.

He has a point. Faq states rhat unless specified you can be affected by multiple buffs of the same kind.

[Arkiham]

14 minutes ago, Chaotic Neutral said:

you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.

This is why it's waiting a faq..

 

It Does not  specifically state that it does not or can not stack, and as per the faq. Is stackable. 

So. Roll a dice let fate decide until a faq

[Aspirant Snaeper]

@Killax You know better than this. 

The last thread on this topic got locked.  Why you or anyone else who was also in the last thread would continue to discuss this is beyond me. 

Verdict: We wait until Games Workshop faq's this and explains why they changed perfectly clear wording for convoluted reasons to spark these debates.

 

[Ben]

Locked again.