JackOfBlades

Indeed, and so then the points drop would matter - which i was trying to state in a roundabout way. And (assuming the units are still qualitatively subpar, but not utterly incapable of inflicting casualties) more bodies would add up to more casualties for the enemy too. I just thought the formulation was a bit odd.

If a points drop "wouldnt have mattered", how could they become "too cheap"?

Hmmm... is it the perspective or does the second head look a bit oversized for that body? maybe it's the massive head tail that does it. The poses are certainly more active, i like the second pose in particular but i also think the first pose will look better once it's placed in a unit.

What kind of change would you like to see more precisely? Do you want major characters killed off? which ones would count as major? If not then why not, and what would count as lasting and meaningful change without that (does Slaanesh's imprisonment count for example? what about if Slaanesh is released from imprisonment, will it still count)? Should the stakes stay about the same throughout the changes, or should the stakes keep escalating? if they should stay the same, how should meaningful change be accomplished? if the stakes should keep escalating, how will that be sustainable?

Have you considered allying in a mindstealer sphiranx instead of taking the dreadful visage, or in addition to it? It's more reliable since it needs no cast and cant be unbound (while also giving you a monster), but the dreadful visage does have the advantage of being able to move before applying its effect, giving it a longer threat range which could be decisive.

Do you have pictures of these? And do you know if the drukhari wyches' legs in particular, but bodies and heads also, would work with the symbaresh parts? I would like my symbaresh to have much more aggressive poses if i buy them, like the wyches do. The symbaresh twinsouls are disserviced from being dual kitted with the myrmidesh painbringers in my opinion, as they are locked into stationary leg poses that fit the myrmidesh much better unless you convert them.

I read this as the bias of the Order factions, specifically whichever ones of them the authors consciously or subconsciously imagine to be conveying the narrative of Age of Sigmar to "us" in our world. So Order's tarnishment of the Destruction cultures as rejecting civilisation is a sentiment of and rallying point for those who call themselves Order, not an objective truth. Of course this might require one to substitute the "plain packaging" of the lore with their own imagination, which may or may not be what you want when talking about introductory material. Personally, i like it this way as it forces you to engage and think. How do you know that an account is completely truthful, simply because it presents itself as authoritative and plays on your passive assumption of it being so?

Blessed is the mind too limited to hope.

This is my problem too as i try to brainstorm slaaneshi lists id like, i just dont have the points to take what i want (which reiterates what has just been gone over in this thread). To be fair, part of the reason for that is that i love the whole army... haha... in particular i keep going 5-10 points over the 2000 limit, it's really frustrating.

How have you guys found the myrmidesh and particularly the symbaresh to work? To me, they seem like they have their niche against other melee armies that dont have charge bonuses. But against shooting, mortal wounds from magic, and strong charge bonuses like dracothian fulminators, i would suspect they are too slow to be effective.

Just a detail, you cannot have more than one Hunters of the Heartlands battalion: "you cannot include the same core battalion from those shown below more than once in your army". Only the ones in the core rules have an unrestricted quantity.

For anyone interested, through sheer coincidence i found at least one such article here. However, the real meat seems to be in Malign Portents.

Ive been searching, but i dont remember what title or phrases to search for. It was an article that explained why each of the Chaos gods was motivated to invade the Realm of Death and try to destroy the undead. I dont remember well enough what it said about Khorne or Slaanesh, but i remember it said (in paraphrase) that Nurgle liked some aspects of what the undead did or were but couldnt stand what undeath itself was, and that few were as horrified as Tzeentch over the undead. I believe it was a Warhammer Community article. Anyone remember?

I sent this email to the AoS FAQ team now: Hopefully they will fix it. A small step, but certainly a morale boost 😉

How have you folks found crypt horrors work with the coherency in 3rd? They lose a 3rd of their output if you reinforce, but you dont want to take them in minimum units as they can get wiped out too quickly. This is particularly bad for crypt horrors since they are neither a horde unit nor have enough wounds to count as 2 models for objectives. Are crypt horrors "supposed" to be like this now, or is their downgrade an ugly side effect of the new edition that a new battletome will or should smooth over?

Sow the seeds of madness 😈

I dont think the aoe buffs would be a "design problem" per se, there are ways to balance that: make the buffer a squishy target, make the buffer give a penalty either to themselves or the units in exchange for the buff (either immediately or in a next phase), increase the opportunity cost. But you probably think so too, i get what your point is. You mean that because it hasnt been made into a tactical choice in its current state, the benefit is out of proportion with the thoughtful risk required, and so such a rebalancing is called for.

Indeed, i think creating a specific subfaction/host for mixed armies like this is the best idea, like the Big WAAAAAAGH!

This artefact is still broken with no fix, right? In that case someone should ask GW if they know about it. It would seem odd that a professional product would contain such an error for so long without getting errata'ed.

I get the mawkrusha's average damage potential to 53. This assumes it has the gore-hacka profile, mean 'un that it rolls 4+3 for, and every single melee and ranged attack hits, wounds and goes through. If you add destroyer to that, it goes up to 80. I dont know whether you mean a 4+ save before or after rend, but in neither case does it do 45-50 wounds per turn, and when it does reach a damage potential of 80 is "only" in one combat phase per game with a 2'' range (so it's not like it can spread the damage out over your whole army).

Great! On the warscroll builder you have to make the LoP the "primary" general for the myrmidesh and symbaresh to start registering as battleline, if you use the "host option: general (invaders)" it doesnt count them. So that's why i second guessed whether that's intentional or (as the case turns out to be) just an oversight in the warscroll builder.

The Invaders battle trait says "your army can have up to 3 generals instead of 1. Only 1 of your generals can have a command trait ...". And the myrmidesh painbringers and symbaresh twinsouls warscrolls say that theyre "Battleline if general is a Lord of Pain". This means you can take painbringers and twinsouls as battleline as long as a lord of pain is one of those 3 generals, even if you give the command trait to a different one, right?

Im curious about blissbarb archers + mindstealer sphiranx + dark delusions + acquiescence. If it goes off, that's 10 shots per unit hitting on 3s rerolling 1s, wounding on 3s, rend 1 damage 1 which doesnt seem bad for picking off support pieces and degrading profiles. With 20 shots youll get about 16 hits, 11 wounds, 5-6 damage against a 3+ save. It's not going to wipe out an army, but it could have a nifty impact. And it's not like youre sinking a bunch of stuff into just those archers, all 3 of the "addons" to them also help out your close combat units. Of course, you would weigh it up against spreading the damage out for more DPs.

One thing that stands out to me about Slaanesh is it's the only chaos god whose battle traits dont work with STD heroes. You cant bring the mark of Slaanesh over, but they dont have the HEDONITE keyword either, so theyre stuck in a no man's land. I think the simplest way to change this is just to get rid of the HEDONITE keyword and change it to SLAANESH like it already is for the other gods, but maybe that breaks something im not aware of. Or you could do what you did in the OP and just make new units, i think that's better anyway.

Nurgle and Slaanesh are mostly antithetical. Nurgle incites despair, where Slaanesh encourages joy. Nurgle urges acceptance in the extreme, meaning the complete abandonment of ego and vanity, where Slaanesh encourages and feeds on obsessive vanity and the primacy of the ego. Nurgle does give a solace and merriment similar to joy once you have accepted his path, and Nurgle also implicitly propounds the primacy of the ego by the fact that Nurgle seeks to impose its own world view on existence. Both of these things means there is a paradoxical common ground between the two gods (no chaos gods are fully antithetical to each other, they are all interdependent and overlapping). But the means by which you accept and walk Nurgle's path are antithetical to the means of Slaanesh.