JackOfBlades

I dont think the loss of I, WS, S and T matters so much, thats just one kind of system. If we still had those, then in AOS terms theyd just make the vampire lord and goblin chief have the same stats. GW can still give things different stats for wounds, saves, attacks, rend, damage and special rules like always strikes first (always, on a 4+, on the charge, ...) with their current system, if they wanted to. So that a goblin chief isnt the equivalent of a vampire lord, but a vampire lord is more equivalent to the things it's supposed to be similar to. It just needs to be done systematically.

I saw the new thread for small heroes after finishing my reply to you, so ill just delete it and go to that thread... 😅

Heres what id do: 1. Copy 40ks system of ATTACHED UNITS, EPIC CHALLENGE stratagem and PRECISION keyword. 2. Rework the buffs of certain combat heroes like the lord of pain to reward being in combat, like the beastlord (foot chaos lords need particularly a rework as they dont actually do anything). 3. Add more sensible granularity to different hero profiles, so a loonboss isnt deadlier than a lord of plagues or equivalent to an abhorrant archregent as is the case now. No one thinks small combat heroes should effortlessly slaughter units of elite troops and be invulnerable against attacks from huge hordes of clanrats, thats just a strawman retort. But for example a chaos lord on foot should have a fighting chance against a dankhold troggoth, because their lore says so: "When challenged they will even stand in the path of a frenzied troggoth". Currently the dankhold will instakill the chaos lord on average, and suffer about 3-4 damage per turn in response before its healing. As their lore and black library novels describe them doing, this would have combat heroes leading from the front, fighting cinematic battles with each other, and the most powerful types of them holding their own against the kind of enemies theyre said to.

Yep. And Glutos is a perfect example of what i mean as unlike Vhordrai there isnt even a generic variation of Glutos' rules. Yes, there will be a limit to how much you can bring your fantasy alive and thats no problem. I dont think anyone expects their generic character to have completely unique equipment or rules compared to every other player's generic character. But i do think GW needs to do a more professional work of designing and balancing the various equipments, artefacts, traits and spells. In 9th edition 40k you had so many choices to make for your keeper of secrets, which exalted upgrade? which warlord trait? which artefact? which spells? In the invaders subfaction of hedonites by contrast, there are hardly choices to be made among the command traits and artefacts and no exalted upgrades at all. And one of the primary complaints of 40k players seems to be that that's gone from the 10th indexes too now, and all you can do is imagine.

I dont really agree, in WHFB there was already a power range of vampires. You had non-heroes like blood knights at the bottom, then thralls, then counts, then lords, dont see why you cant have the same thing here. I also personally strongly dislike the move of making special characters crowd out generic characters.

Agreed. Since they almost certainly wont add I, WS, S and T back, i hope interaction changes like paired hero-unit activations and reduced hero sniping, plus their claimed systemic rebalance of the profiles throughout the game to match the lore, will reach a similar endpoint. My bottomline is that no matter how they do it, combat heroes should be incentivised to lead from the front as they are depicted in the lore. You shouldnt be incentivised to use something like a lord of pain, slaughterpriest or vampire lord as a non-combatant (unless the vampire is supposed to be a frail caster). Chaos lords happen to also need a glowup to merit taking them in general.

Just a detail but the slickblade attack bonus is against 1-3 wound targets not 1-2, so they dont fall off yet here. It's the hellscourge striders and daemon seekers who have the 1-2 wound range.

I really like that idea of objectives effectively getting their own terrain rules. It provides a more intuitive and interesting reason to fight over them besides just arbitrary "points", and could shake things up in a good way.

From what i read in Lord of Undeath, Neferata has little ability to be more than Nagash's tool simply because of the power her condition gives Nagash over her (and Mannfred). Something she is keenly aware and anxious of. To change that they would have to set up a culmination of how Nagash's power over the mortarchs is broken, which cant come from only the mortarchs themselves either as Nagash couldnt not see that coming.

Who is that female stormcast with the hammer? she looks so damn cool!

If all the subfaction artefacts and spells had at least been worth using, it wouldnt be the biggest deal. But Invaders are sitting at only 1 artefact and 1 spell that dont suck. To top that off, you always want the same command traits too (hurler base, chain hurler + botb) because there is nothing else. It's like running a unique character.

You get both effects, see 1.6.2 simultaneous effects, and it doesnt fall under 1.6.4 since they arent triggered effects. This is why the tuskhelm artefact specifies that it cant be combined with other impact hits, because you are normally able to unless it says otherwise.

But how did you create it?

What's that big pink orb? looks great!

Why did you go for 2 units of 3 fiends instead of 1 unit of 6? I think Godseekers have some more potential tech with the ritual knife, since hunter supreme can prevent pile ins to lower the return damage the keeper will take. But that wont work against gargants of course, and it's not easy to wipe out a gargant in one turn to use heroic recovery (to the extent it or emerald lifeswarm would help).