TechnoVampire
-
Posts
253 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by TechnoVampire
-
-
1 hour ago, Dogmantra said:
They stack.
Under Dice Roll Modifiers, the info box says "In most cases, modifiers are cumulative. However, some dice rolls, such as hit and wound rolls, will specify that the roll cannot be modified by more than +1 or -1." If you then look at the ward section, it does not specify that the ward can only be modified by +1 or -1, so ward modifiers stack.
That’s really helpful.
I thought they did as I was sure I had read that, but couldn’t find it.
it confirms my artefact choice in my nagash list 😊
Thanks for helping!
-
Hi,
Quick question about ward save rolls and bonuses provided to them.
if you have multiple abilities providing a bonus to ward save rolls do they stack?
the example I’m looking at is SBGL grave-sand shard: “once/game add 1 to rolls for deathless minions”
and
Death magic incarnate: “… add 1 to ward rolls for that unit until the end of that phase”
??
(thanks)
-
45 minutes ago, pnkdth said:
Though it looks like an update for Gitz it is what I'm expecting for the remaining AoS tomes. For example, the HoS one is probably similar to LRL in that it will consolidate all the various warscrolls into a single tome + either integrate or remove the sub-sub-factions + and (possibly) update the 'revel in pain' to seem less of a band-aid. Nothing in the development of AoS for many tomes in a row now suggest or even hint of a new and impactful update.
I do not think I'm being "negative" either since it is what we've been getting. Even S2D who got models didn't exactly WOW us with new and exciting mechanics, did it? What I'm actually saying is to stop expecting massive updates for AoS time and time again because they're not happening. The system is not big enough in GW's eyes for that yet.
When you accept that the AoS team's goal has been to update the game things, even though lacking bombastic releases, start to make a lot more sense and seem less bleak. I mean, listening to THW he keeps saying that the game is looking better and better... Even "the best its ever been."
So my question is, do we want huge shake-ups and, most likely, a significant increase in power creep each tome or do we want the dev team to improve the game as a whole first? In other words, we're getting frequent updates at the cost of significant and substantial ones.
A part of me want the bombastic upset of the meta but another part of me is coming around to the updated tomes. At least for now.
I think it’s ok to hope that the devs are capable of recognising issues in tomes that are as old as 3 years, and applying a little knowledge and creativity to change the core mechanics, making them better and more interesting, without breaking the game. Gitz have consistently been one of the worst performing armies, so it’s clear they have issues. I would hope that they could solve some of these issues with more than warscroll upgrades, and try to address the core mechanics. It’s been years. I don’t think that’s too much to expect. I’m optimistic that the new Gitz tome will be more than that, but copy pasting old tomes like we’ve seen with factions like skaven, without doing anything new where necessary, just feels lazy.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, DinoJon said:
I think that's a little hyperbolic. The new changes are great and really add some strength to the army as a whole. With the Loonshrine providing a large bubble of Moonlight and the bonuses from the it being relatively light I feel like the whole army can be competitive without an overhaul of that one allegiance ability.
Its just my opinion. I began by acknowledging the revealed changes are positive, however the moon is currently the only gloomspite allegiance ability, so for me if they’ve recognised that things being completely random generally isn’t actually that fun, and changing them in warscrolls, only to have them remain in the sole allegiance ability, that will really undermine those changes. I think not having allegiance ability’s outside of a 12” bubble on turn 1 is bad game design, but it really is my hope that they’ll have changed that.
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, Gitzdee said:
Yeah the moon has never been usefull to me up to the point that i didnt use it at all. Hope it really gets better this time.
1 hour ago, Ganigumo said:I already don't like that the moon effects are the same. The biggest issue with the last one was that the moon buffs weren't good enough to justify such a random ability.
Rally on a 4+ is strong but probably problematic.
And it looks like keyword bingo is still there to some extent.
Seems like an update rather than a rewrite. Could still be good if the scrolls get updated appropriately.I agree. The rules they previewed were all positive, but if they haven’t sorted out the random nature of the moon it will all be in vain. I find it hard to believe they would have recognised that completely random movement characteristics, or multiple dice rolls for an underwhelming regeneration wasn’t fun and fixed those, while leaving one situational allegiance ability, that’s completely random and doesn’t activate until the second turn. It’s GW though, so you can never be sure. The fact that they haven’t changed the moon buffs is dull if nothing else.
-
(Im also not convinced of an imminent new tomb for the same reasons)
-
8 hours ago, Sception said:
To be clear, my last post was very specifically trying to see things from GW's perspective. From my personal perspective as a player there are a *bunch* of things that want or even need changing, I just don't think they're issues that show up in the places the dev team is watching. Like, yeah, I agree that the current generic vampire lord falls well short of what their lore implies they should be, even in AoS where the strength of a vampire lord relative to their divinely empowered rivals and peers in other factions is less than it was in WHFB. BUT people still regularly field vampire lords even in highly competitive games, mostly as support pieces or to activate auras in certain bloodlines. We've been told what factors GW looks at to determine what aspects of the game need changing - does the faction show up in competitive settings, what is the overall faction win rate in competitive settings, does a particular unit or option see too little use in competitive lists (or too much in the case of generic options), and does the presence or absence of a particular unit or option affect the win rate of lists that have the option vs. ones that don't too greatly. None of those factors would inform GW that the vampire lord - or honestly pretty much any other SBGL unit - is problem in need of fixing.
We do get more in depth examinations of questions like 'does this units rules and use on the table reflect its lore and narrative' when books get in depth re-examinations and updates, but not every battletome release /is/ an in depth re-examination or update, and given how recent the previous soulblight book was, how GW's metawatch metrics are signalling that the current book is fine as it is, and how packed the 2023 calendar is with other major projects that clearly require far more attention... look, there's room for significant changes to the SBGL book, and I'll be happy if we see some, but actually expecting any at this point strikes me as setting ourselves up for disappointment.
TBH, I still find the idea that we're even on the schedule for this year to be pretty iffy. Even seemingly reliably rumors in the past have fallen through, and GW's had a lot of problems with serious delays in recent years. Heck, such delays have heavily impacted soulblight already what with whatever cosmic disaster befell the Cursed City release.
I completely agree. I understood that’s what you meant in your previous post, and when trying to predict what we might see in a future tomb, GW’s perspective is the only one that matters. I feel like they are maybe moving in the right direction by at least using metrics like win rate and competitive play as markers of what needs changing, as opposed to whatever random methods they used before (potential profit predictions?). Maybe in the future we will even see them start to take community feedback on board.
I’m also totally with you on vampire lords, they don’t align with their supposed power or lore at all, and I feel that’s an area SBGL are lacking in more generally.
-
9 hours ago, Sception said:
this is exactly what they did with the second lrl book. and they specifically asvertised that book as being optional "if you already have the lrl book from not that long ago, you don't need to buy a whole new book already, you can just get the white dwarf with the new warscrolls". the point is to minimize frustration from players who just bought the book already, but also they couldn't not put out a new book since the old one is now missing units, and that white dwarf that has them isn't going to be in circulation for long.
'why not revise other stuff if you're putting out a new book anyway'? again, to avoid making players feel like dupes for buying the original book in the first place. also because new revisions require more dev time and playtest time, not to mention writing, proof reading, & editing. There's limited time, budget, & worker hours to go around, & I imagine projects like 10th ed 40k, codex: world eaters, the entirely re-imagined cities of sigmar, or honestly any of updates to older 2e AoS factions that weren't already designed for 3e like the current SBGL book already was are all higher priority.
besides, by all gw's competitive metrics, the current sbgl book is doing fine to great. solid internal variety despite the huge number of units. overall win rates holding very close and steady within a couple percentage points of that magic 50% target number. Right now there's literally nothing about the current book that needs changing, excepting only that the book still depends on a white dwarf supplement for stuff like faction objectives & 3e style path to glory rules, and that white dwarf is hard to find now even if new players knew they were supposed to look for it.
That's what a new book would be printed to fix, assuming again the rumors are even accurate. And its a fix that wouldn't even take any dev time to implement. why add costs arbitrarily where none are needed? Why eat into limited dev time when 2023 is already packed to bursting with major all-hands-on-deck releases?
I think from a GW perspective a lot of what you say makes sense. They’re definitely a company (like the vast majority) driven by profits, metrics and sales, and I wouldn’t be expecting major changes if a new book comes out this year. I’m not convinced there are compelling reasons to reprint a carbon copy book, but I can see it happening. GSG, BOC and FEC sat on their books for over 3 years and some of them didn’t even have sub-factions. It seems unlikely that GW would want to print the same book a year later just to include a white dwarf update, even from a sales point of view, although if they did it for LRL, then it’s definitely not out-with the reals of possibility. I think the current book has many aspects that could be changed or improved, but I understand I’m looking at it from a players perspective and not a company who are ultimately driven by profits. Despite the rumours I’m not convinced that there will be a book this year, but If it’s a going to be a copy of the current one I’d prefer they just waited and utilised the resources for more interesting releases.
-
On 1/3/2023 at 12:37 AM, Sception said:
i wouldn't even expect small changes, other than scroll for the new unit & the changes from the white dwarf update. most of the book i'd expect to be a page for page reprint.
What would be the point in this if they did it? I imagine very few people who own the current book would buy a new one just to have a new warscroll and the white dwarf updates included... mind you it’s GW so who knows. I hope there’s more included if we are getting a new book this year. I like a lot about the current book, but there’s plenty that could be improved and updated. It would be a waste of everyone’s time of they don’t add or change anything.
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:
Only dissapointing thing is it looks like BOC may only be getting a Hero model, which is rather pathetic by GW. Update your old ranges James!!
If skaven are anything to go by GW currently have 0 motivation to do this. It’s a big middle finger to people who have been collecting for decades and just want models that compare with the newer army’s.
-
2
-
-
The Christmas reveals so far have felt pretty underwhelming. I feel like GW have been drip feeding us information and models they’ve had sitting around for some amount of time. The StD release was a nice surprise, but new battletome announcements and random hero models aren’t particularly news worthy or exciting to me in the grand scheme of things. I hope 2023 is a bit more eventful for AOS 🤞
-
3
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, Morglum StormBasha said:
There’s a new command, use at start of combat, gives +1 attack to unit that’s not hero or monster that didn’t charge and you can’t pile in. Spell that can do d6 mortals on a 4+ to units on objectivesThere’s an artifact to let you set a champ up on reserve.
Traits
A trait that lets you use a command ability 3 times once per battle,
another that makes a GC count as 10 on an objective where there’s no other GC.
A once per battle teleport
And a resurrection stone. 3+ ignore last wound and heal d3.6 new missions. 6 remain from current
Nidus paths
Battlelines drawn
Prize of Gallet
Real stone cache
Presence of idols
(Can’t remember the 6th)5+ ward for GC (unclear if trait or artifact)
up to 3 units in the battalion and they can ignore the gally champ within 1” rule
Gally Vets is now a battalion.
2-4 units (unsure if they’re troop units as there’s that new symbol)
Carrying over the fight in two ranks rule to this battalion
(not up to 3 but exactly 3)Thanks for sharing… some annoying little points increases for SBGL that are going to throw a bunch of my lists off.
-
Excuse my ignorance on the topic but has a reboxing always indicated a new battletome so far?
-
Just now, El Syf said:
Got my hopes up before the current time that we might get vampiric powers back in a proper sense and they would actually be useful. It might happen next time round…
I have a lot of love for the SBGL book, but I feel there are a lot of improvements that could be made. There are some wins like; sub factions, allegiance ability’s, command traits… but others things like the lore of the vampires for example sadden me 😭
-
4 minutes ago, El Syf said:
Blood knights and skegs are getting reboxed as per rumour thread; this I understand usually goes with a new tome?!
might be next year if that’s the case.
That would be exciting, but I assumed that the two new death battletome’s announced for next year would be OBR and FEC 😣
-
On another note does anyone feel like the majority of vampire hero’s are pretty underwhelming? I feel like having similar combat characteristics to standard foot hero’s in army’s like Gitz is incongruous with basic fantasy lore. I’d happily pay more points for vampire characters that provide some buffs and also have decent combat potential. 5 wounds and minimal/ no healing and underwhelming attack profiles doesn’t feel very vampire-esque. I guess Cado breaks that mould a bit, but doesn’t provide any buffs and also being named restricts his uses.
-
1
-
-
I agree. I’m generally a bit too lazy/ slow painter to field hordes (hence having a lot of grey nighthaunt), but I feel like a few viable deathrattle builds are sorely lacking from SBGL. They have always been a death staple from early fantasy battles, vampire counts and LON, and allow for a very different play style and aesthetic approach to the current lists. There are also plenty of good models to support them (although I’m still praying for new GG), but they need a subfaction and hero’s with decent warscrolls to function properly. Hopefully that’ll be updated whenever we get another battletome.
-
It’s like a basic reflex for me now! I genuinely can’t understand how people paint without licking the brush?? 😅
-
2
-
-
(With the exception of nighthaunt and expert conquerors maybe)
-
Nice, that gives him a bit of extra value. I’d love to see the rise of infantry and a move away from the shooting dominated meta with the next GHB. It would allow units like grave guard to shine, and death in general would benefit a lot from being able to make use of their slow but effective infantry. I feel that this GHB hasn’t been particularly kind to death players.
-
1
-
-
I don’t think they’ll be squeezing out a unit of 5 blood knights in any of my lists any time soon though unfortunately 🥲
-
5 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:
I gave the warscroll a closer look and there are some fun things about it.
The Sons alone have 10 wounds at a 4+ save. But their Shield Wall ability can put them at save characteristic 3+, after which they can still receive all-out defense to go to a real 2+.
Their damage output is fairly decent if you include King Velmorn. Velmorn himself is extremely fighty, too: 5 attacks, 2 damage and mortals on hit in addition. I hope that sets a new standard for Wight Kings or even Soulblight heroes in general.
There is the option to stop enemies from piling in. This is strong and can be used to pin units until they retreat, if your positioning is good. The main problem is that the sons are only move 6 and Velmorn is only move 4, so pulling it off will be hard. Normal Grave Guard can at least deploy in the grave to help get into position, but the sons are not SUMMONABLE.
Finally, the sons and velmorn don't seem to be faction locked. So they can gain the bonuses from Vyrkos, Legion of Night and Legion of Blood. That's at least more fun allowed than the Exiled Dead get.
Nice run down. Some of that had crossed my mind when I first looked over the warscroll, which is what made think they might have some play initially. The easy to access 2+ save, using a free command and shield wall is nice, especially when you can bring them back on a 4+ at the end of each combat!
I also really like the 2 mortals on a 6 rule and would love to see that brought in as standard across SBGL hero’s. It feels very ‘Death’ thematically, and would make hero’s feel more fighty as well as unique.
I hadn’t really considered their play in the other sub factions as I mostly just play kastelai, but that’s another good point, and makes the unit feel a bit more versatile. As you say it’s also more fun when the warscrolls interact with the rest of your army/ sub-factions, and makes them feel a slightly more integrated as opposed to tacked on out of obligation.
Their slow speed and lack of summonable key word however, will probably prevent them seeing as much play as they could otherwise.
-
I pretty much agree with all of the above… They look fantastic and I want to like them, but without them interacting with any other units, being able to provide good utility, or survivability, I don’t see them being much use on the table. Everything is ‘fine’ for the points but unless a unit (especially one that doesn’t interact with others) can tank, move, cast or hit really hard, then it’s not going to be doing much and the points could be spent on any number of other things that fill a role.
-
… if he supported grave guard or deathrattle in general then he’d be fantastic.
AoS3 - Soulblight Gravelord Discussion
in Death
Posted · Edited by TechnoVampire
I also enjoy having multiple artefact and command trait choices, though it can be frustrating when there are a few good ones locked into specific sub factions. If they simplify them into one, then I hope the majority are unique and useful. Saying that Gitz got a whole host of unique ones for their sub factions.
I’m really hoping the spell lores get a bit of a rework. There are currently too many similar spells with very meh mortal wound effects. I’d love to see a bit more utility and potentially some debuff spells in the lore of the vampires.
like Neil above, I’d like to see death rattle get a bit of love, providing them with a decent sub faction or some viable hero suport.
I’d love a vampire lord that feels worthy of the title. Particularly something mounted/ has mobility and maybe provides buffs to other vampires.
mostly I think our book is in a good place, just being outclassed a little with some more recent tomes, so bringing it up to par with a few adjustments would be great, as opposed to a major rework.
lastly I’d really love if we got new grave guard models (though I’m not holding out much hope anytime soon, based on all the other planned model releases). Based on the other recent skeleton releases I think they’d be incredible.