JackOfBlades
-
Posts
131 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by JackOfBlades
-
-
35 minutes ago, MotherGoose said:
I'll be a parrot again and say that whilst I want certain characters to be more impactful (vampire lord always pops up for me) I don't think it's possible with our rules.
A vampire lord could be completely different to a skaven warlord in the old world due to the statistics they possess. When you're rolling 2d6 and there's nothing to change your hit and wound profile or even any change depending what you're fighting, everything becomes sort of the same.
For instance, a vampire lord could be higher WS and S/T compared to a goblin lord, meaning that yes they would cost more, but they would also slap lesser 'mortals' in melee. They'd be harder to wound than your usual troops and would be harder to hit with higher WS. When it all boils down to 3+ 3+ you can't have too much difference. Doesn't matter if my 3000 year old vampire that's mastered all forms of combat and weapon is fighting a snail or kragnos himself, he hits and wounds on 3s. Elves used to be super high initiative and weapon skill to combat the low toughness, orcs used to be high strength and toughness to combat the low initiative etc. AoS simply isn't the game for this lore/racial standout sort of rules. It's harder to balance (I assume?), and I can't see it changing so drastically when they want it easy to learn and quick to play.
The game is awesome fun and the models are amazing, once I accepted that my vampire lords were just the generic foot lord reskinned as a vampire and that heroes are more for buffing, with the god and centrepiece models being the true powerhouses and lure of AoS, I was much happier playing. I used to wish and wish and wish for the racial/lore style differences to return and every single time a new book came out was disappointed again, its best to forget it and play the game for what it is.
I've been jumping back to the old world here and there especially whilst waiting for AoS 4.0 and its been great fun and scratches the itch of a more thematic 'battle' and lore based profiles perfectly for me. The two games are so different to one another it's great to play both - for those that haven't tried it and want powerful foot heroes I'd recommend it for sure.
What I really think AoS misses on is point based artefacts/traits/powers. You could easily have a generic vampire lord be what they are currently, then give us the option to add up to 100 points of something. An extra cast, bonus to cast, extra attacks on the charge, more wounds - something at least to make them more fun rather than just the +1 attack ability that just feels like we are playing a card game and placing a +1 attack card down on our turn.
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 4/23/2024 at 1:15 PM, Satyrical Sophist said:
Aren't felwaters and rockguts still troggoths? Why do you assume it has to be the biggest troggoth.
If the chaos lord has a fighting chance against a dank hold or other equivalent then it would have to be really very expensive. It would also be a lot of force on a tiny base. There are some blenders that size, but I can really only think of Gotrek and Light of Eltharion, and those are much easier to notice. People already complain about how deadly they are, and having just some not particularly distinctive heroes be super deadly is a minefield. Oh no, I didn't realise it was the chaos lord, I thought it was the aspiring champion. One of them is a fully capable of murdering 200 points of combat unit and the other is chip damage. Both are caped chaos warriors in heavy plate. Even before you get into people with converted models for it.
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.-
3
-
-
16 hours ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:
Yes, that irks me too. From a lore point of view, it seems silly that Archaon or whoever turns up for every minor skirmish that goes on. Plus I like creating my own heroes, giving them names and backgrounds and whatnot.
Admittedly I'm in the middle of painting up Glutos at the moment, so I obviously don't dislike named characters that much. But I'm not intending to use him in every game.
Yep. And Glutos is a perfect example of what i mean as unlike Vhordrai there isnt even a generic variation of Glutos' rules.
9 hours ago, Lucentia said:I guess I'm in the minority on this, perhaps, but for me 'my dudes' is something that has always mostly been something you do in your head, rather on the table. Like, even in WHFB, a game with a reasonable amount of extra options for your heroes, the leader of my ogre army was Frigga Blackfoot, a bruiser BSB who'd chewed off her own frozen leg so that she could use it to club a poisonous drake/monster to death whilst trapped beneath a treacherous glacier (amongst other bits of back story she'd pick up along the way) but none of that was represented for her mechanically, there was no 'sky-iron peg leg (10pts)' weapon option you could take, or whatever.
And the same has kinda continued to be true for my through AoS, I don't feel like I need to points buy extra wizard levels or a smiting sword of +1 attack to make my guys feel unique (Maybe partly because they still wouldn't be, if everyone's playing with the same set of options) that sort of personal narrative is something that exists better off table in my mind, like choice of paint scheme, or how you want to theme your bases, or what pet units you always like to bring, that kind of thing.
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. -
4 hours ago, Baron Klatz said:
Yeah, the main reason the World-that-was vampires were so broken is because they Were the lynchpin of the army.
You killed the vampire and the whole army literally crumbled away without their presence. So had to be super hard to even hurt.
In AoS not only are there entire warbands of vampires & common cavalry squadrons of Blood knights but the units themselves like skeletons are very self-sufficient(many actually being sentient skeletons from a Deathrattle kingdom that joined up with the vampires to protect them from the Ossiarchs who want to turn basic skelies into golem parts)
So the vampires are watered down as there’s already so many of them instead of one or a handful being a super rare sight(on the contrary there’s entire empires of them in Shyish, I imagine eventually we’ll see a proper vampire infantry unit too. We already technically have some)
But we can get insane legendary heroes like a buffed Radukar since they’re heroes of heroes and close to nigh on gods of power.
Similar situation for chaos champions now and we’re even seeing new Stormcast legendary heroes with near a thousand years of deeds & experience turned into units(Reclusians)
it’s the whole “everything’s special so nothing’s special” thing at work so the pros & cons of that are pretty much up to your tastes and which aesthetics you prefer.
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.
-
5
-
-
8 hours ago, MotherGoose said:
The trouble (in my opinion) is without drastically increasing wound profile in addition to attack damage they'd be too hard to balance and would potentially be a huge waste of points because (currently) foot heroes are so easy to snipe with magic and/or shooting, and extremely easy to kill in melee for the most part.
Again, might sound like a broken record, but without different stats and profiles it's too hard to do. If we had S vs T then your chaos lord could have high toughness so he doesn't necessarily have to worry about weaker units and can happily go into combat. When you're playing with just two d6 rolls to get attacks in and nothing to really change anything based on what you're fighting against, you end up with what we have now. A naked ghoul can slap your chaos lord just as easily as he can slap archaon, just as easily as he can slap a clanrat or zombie. There's no change for what he's fighting against which makes dealing 5 damage incredibly easy when you throw a few more ghouls in the mix. If this ghoul was wounding your chaos lord on 5s or 6s then suddenly the damage massively drops down, add in WS vs WS and it goes down even more.
This also adds to list building and more balanced armies as you generally have to take a variety of units with different 'jobs' like anti tank, anti horde, anti hero etc. etc.
I'm also an advocate for how AoS do it as its so easy especially for newer players, it's just a shame to have to lose out on the fluff of the units (especially heroes like we say). However I realised years ago that if beastly fluffy foot heroes is what you *really* want from the game, then AoS is simply just not that game. I now play 40k and ToW to scratch that itch, and AoS for quicker games with crazy magic and awesome models.
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.-
1
-
-
On 3/11/2024 at 11:22 PM, Poryague said:
Comparing slick blades, 20 daemonettes and fiends
Damage to 3 w models
Fiends daemonettes close fiends win again higher armour Slickblades completely fall off due to no longer getting bonus attack.
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.
-
On 1/17/2024 at 6:53 PM, JackStreicher said:
Counter point: Keep battle tactics in the shape of the scenario providing a small list of them, while being the only way to score.
Objectives might get a new role outside of scoring which could enable them to become terrain or physical markers: Replenishing troops, rallying (please, change battleshock), more defense etc. They could become a cool hybrid of terrain and effect.
To me it’s either standing in magic circles and winning OR doing nonsense because reasons and then magically winning - both warps the game too much out of shape to a point where the immersion is gone and I could simply play chess instead.
oh, almost forgot: Make the Double Turn tied to specific Scenarios as well. I thoroughly hate it as a ever-present rule.
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 1/11/2024 at 3:26 PM, Sception said:
The Ushoran stuff is great, and really propels him into a position as an important and unpredictable player in the core narrative going forward. At the same time, I'm disappointed by the limited presence of the Ossiarchs and non-presence of the Nighthaunts - though maybe they play a bigger role in the Aqshy side of the story this time around. A bit more significantly, I'm frustrated to see Neferata once again playing the jobber. She's been stuck in that roll too much over the course of AoS, and it does undermine her ability to be taken seriously as the threat that she should be in the overall narrative. But that's more a complaint about a trend going back to 1e, more so than this specific instance.
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.
-
19 hours ago, Baron Klatz said:
Who is that female stormcast with the hammer? she looks so damn cool!
-
10 hours ago, azdimy said:
The masque replaces Lurid Haze. It s a shame we lost 3 subfactions in this battletome and basically only 1 sees play in competitive gaming. Restricting enhancements being sub faction specific is also terrible. Hopefully some positive changes come our way soon!
That book really feels it was written under the 2.0 directions. No 3.0 book has any subfactions specific Artefacts as far as I know. This is an old concept we saw in aos 2.0, and they pushed it even a step further by making the spell lore subfaction specific!
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.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Izotzuhure said:
Also, would you activate both Speedchaser and the Exalted chariot's impact hits after charging or would you need to choose one effect only?
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.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Unit1126PLL said:
Thanks; just a random terrain piece. We blended our terrain kits as my daemon realm corrupted Aqshy.
But how did you create it?
-
8 hours ago, Unit1126PLL said:
Played my first game against Seraphon tonight (first non-stormcast). Went extremely well. Ended the game bottom of BR2.
We are playing path to glory so it is a bit different than most. I have had no problem getting 15-20 depravity top of Turn 1. Some pictures:
What's that big pink orb? looks great!
-
59 minutes ago, Enoby said:
Thanks for the write up @LeonBox!
I had a game against Gargants - no pictures as there were a lot of proxies and blank bases so not the easiest to follow with a visual aid!
My list was:
- Army Faction: Hedonites of Slaanesh
- Army Type: Godseekers
- Grand Strategy: Glutton for Depravity
LEADERS
Lord of Pain (135)*
Keeper of Secrets (400)*
- General
- Command Traits: Master of Magic
- Ritual Knife
- Artefacts of Power: Girdle of the Realm-racer
- Spells: Progeny of Damnation
Shalaxi Helbane (420)**
- Living Whip
- Spells: Paths of the Dark Prince
BATTLELINE
Blissbarb Archers (150)*
Seekers (140)*
Seekers (140)**
OTHER
Fiends (200)*
Fiends (200)*
Slickblade Seekers (200)**
TERRAIN
1 x Fane of Slaanesh (0)
CORE BATTALIONS
*Battle Regiment
**Battle Regiment
TOTAL POINTS: 1985/2000
My aim was to test out Shalaxi, the Fiends, and the KoS without the Aegis, so I won't go through the game step by step and instead will just comment on them. I'll also comment on Godseekers.
Shalaxi
With a prime target in their sights, Shalaxi should have been right at home killing gargants, and in many ways they did a good job! Armed with a while rather than the Aegis (wanting to test it out), they did 1 damage in shooting and failed to reduce attacks by one. They did however do 17 damage in combat vs the Gargant, which certainly helped depravity generation. Unfortunately I didn't realise that gargants had an ability to do 4d6 mortal wounds, which quickly squashed Shalaxi flat.
Overall, their damage (with their spell) seemed very good against heroes, but I wouldn't take them without the Aegis again. Even with their high save vs heroes, that mortal wound and bad luck protection is just too important to miss out on, especially as the Whip doesn't always work. With the Aegis, they may well have lived to fight another day.
The ritual knife Keeper
I was a bit more worried about the KoS, though the Girdle should theoretically protect them a little in my turn (when it comes to choosing safe combats). The KoS did good damage, killing a unit of small gargants (and doing 6 mortal wounds with the ritual knife, and another 3 later), but again I just don't see any argument convincing enough to take the knife over the shield. The amount of damage the KoS took was unsustainable, no matter the damage it did in return.
The Girdle was, as expected, fantastic and I would definitely consider it again combined with the Aegis. While I can definitely see the KoS being swingy, I did pretty well with them so no complaints here!
Fiends
In a gargant game, fiends are bound to shins, and my two units did do some decent work, though perhaps not quite as much as I'd have wanted! Their big bonus was actually their -1 to hit and wound, which sometimes had the gargants doing no damage at all.
I'd be fully up for taking another unit of 3 for just this sort of match up.
Godseekers
While not the ideal army to use Godseekers in, it did get me out of being first turn charged so that's a bonus! Other than that, I tended to be in combat with all units after turn 2, so I couldn't use it. The Girdle was great though, so I'd be up for using it again.
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). -
43 minutes ago, azdimy said:
Anybody else find the fane of Slaanesh not useful anymore? No more depravity generation with it and plenty of other means to get +1 to wound that there are no reason to stack mean it s been relegated to a terrain piece to hide small heroes for me. It s a shame really when you compare it with the new khorne skull altar. Reroll prayers, increase invocation range, can summon within 16 and does so even if smashed to rubble
The fane was one of the things i thought they would rewrite for sure, i was very surprised that it's essentially the same.
-
Does anyone know why the wheels of excruciation cost 80 compared to the 60 of the other endless spells? I feel like at best they just do a bit more of what the army already fulfills, damage against units with low saves, no wards and poor magic defense. But i want there to be something i dont know that the designers/you guys know.
-
2 hours ago, Unit1126PLL said:
Plus it still gives YOU all the information too. Just don't offer a temptation if the unit fully dies or something.
That's true, why didnt i think of that? doh!
-
1 hour ago, Thor said:
Did we clear out how temptation dice works? attacks are calculated once at a time or?
Three ways you can go:
#1 - Ask the opponent ahead of the rolls whether they plan to accept or refuse any temptation. Speeds up the process, but opponents will be against it since it gives them less information to decide with.
#2 - Calculate it one roll at a time. Slows the game, and opponents will still be against it since they want option #3 which is...
#3 - Make combined rolls and decide after theyre done. People playing against Slaanesh will favor this since it's the best option for them while still speeding up the game.
The only thing im sure of is that GW did not or should not intend to slow the game down to one dice roll at a time. I think #2 or #3 is closest to RAW as it stands since the ability triggers when your opponent makes a roll, which they obviously havent made if you ask them ahead of time, and theres nothing that says it cancels the combined attacks rule. But i obviously hope they will FAQ it to #1.-
1
-
-
On 3/12/2023 at 4:29 PM, Adammck66 said:
Hey guys, how do allies work with chaos?
If I ally in 10 Plaguebearer's for example, do they lose Disgustingly resilient?
Thanks.
Yes they lose it, since the ability is not on their warscroll but rather a battle trait of a Maggotkin of Nurgle army.
-
25 minutes ago, MothmanDraws said:
I can see chosen doing next to no damage vs painbringers with -1 to hit (glutos or depravity) 2+ save from contesting, mystic shield, -2 attacks and all out defence. TBH I would be interested in units that can break through that, anything that can do damage through that can also just be tanked on lord of hubris for 1 turn.
I do worry that our super brick will be rough for some armies, though I think the best solution vs slaanesh is magic, chuck mortal wounds into them.
Mortals that dont depend on attacks (like Nurgle and charge mortals), objective swamping (and sniping out any hellscourge hellstriders), or pin & win is what i see to deal with that stuff. I think that's very thematic - it's effective against prideful foes who refuse to not beat them directly, and less effective against humble foes who swallow their pride and do the unglamorous things necessary for victory.
-
1
-
-
The book's overall design is pretty much exactly what i hoped they would do with it, you can tell that there has been a change in the management of the battletome(s) at GW. Even my pet peeve, the keeper of secret's weapon options, have all been made worth taking - something i really did not expect.
For example the ritual knife was absolute garbage before, but now you can take: pretenders + strength of godhood + euphoric killers + ritual knife. With other buffs the knife gets set to 2+/2+/-2/2, and every wound and mortal wound it causes will generate depravity. That means you could generate up to 8 depravity from the knife alone with a use of euphoric killers, on top of the much improved damage it does. Then the keeper's wound degradation and defensive support options are much better, and the knife helps finish off units so you can use heroic recovery the subsequent turn, making sinistrous hand less necessary. It's changes like this that show the competence level for battletome writing has increased.-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, Jaskier said:
Soon, everyone. The new Metawatch article said the next two Battletomes (which, according to the roadmap, are Chaos tomes) are going to be revealed on Saturday. We may well be free of this book in a few weeks!
At last. I want:
- Compelling and slaaneshy spell lores
- The 4 keeper offhand options to all be worth taking
- No options that are made dysfunctional and left as such (fiends and coherency until recently, all non-hero units before the battletome errata, the excessive violence and locus changes that made strongest alone and breathtaker unplayable along other pretenders nerfs, struggling warscrolls like slaangors and blissbarb seekers, ...)
- Rework summoning so you can both have an all mortals army and the daemon warscrolls are worth starting with
- No command trait and artefact straitjacketing with the subfactions
- More slaaneshy rules for both battle traits, subfactions and warscrolls like Nurgle (and other tomes) got, there is sooo much you could do, this is an army whose lore revolves around wanting to be and to feel more than the mundane. But instead the design is one of the most "basic" of all.-
4
-
-
6 hours ago, EntMan said:
Or if it slays friendly models. I think it can affect your own troops too.
Oh yeah, that's right - sloppy wording by me (i wasnt thinking about it hitting your own troops 😁).
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted · Edited by JackOfBlades
Still, anything that moves GW in the direction of fixing balance by fixing stats, traits, enhancements and such is welcome. Instead of "fixing" balance through unthematic point cuts and BT freebies, that bypass the game's soul of the lore coming alive on the tabletop.
Im also holding my breath to see what theyre doing with Narrative Play, where BTs are not a concern.