Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Sception

Members
  • Content Count

    1,444
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Sception last won the day on October 12 2018

Sception had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

928 Celestant-Prime

About Sception

  • Rank
    Lord Celestant

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There was also a clearly mortisan crescent axe head, probably an underworlds or warcry release? And a raven holding a key, which could be anything, but they show up on undead stuff more often than elsewhere.
  2. Nice! This is a really nice scheme. I particularly like the contrast between the green bases & red armor.
  3. It reminds me a lot of this bit from back in May: Which to some looked like maybe a vamprie arm, but to me, between the rather corroded nature of the weapon and the tuft of maybe fur on the arm looks more like a FEC model. FEC don't traditionally carry weapons - corroded or otherwise, but we did see an exception in the unit leader of the Underworlds Warband. So maybe another warband for FEC, or perhaps a Warcry group? Or maybe even a new unit. Semi-elite infantry scale ghouls with a bit more of their mind to them such that they can actually wield weapons and maybe wear scraps of armor or whatever would be a cool addition to the line, imo. Or maybe it's not FEC at all, and is in fact new Soulblight or even Legions stuff? Regardless, both the style of the above halberd and the pits and damage on it look very similar to the sword in the earlier pic, and it's a style that's mostly only seen with undead stuff, so interesting to see what it turns out to be.
  4. Mengel doesn't seem to be working on his Homebrew TK battletome anymore, and GW aren't going to be updating the official AoS rules any time soon. If the Old World game gets a new Tomb Kings army then they might get some form of official AoS rules as well, much as many 30k units have FW rules to play them in 40k, but that's far from guaranteed, especially since the rumored time period of the Old World game is not one where Vampire Counts, not Tomb Kings, are by far the most active undead faction. As such, if anyone is going to be adapting Tomb King rules to the current AoS design standards, it probably has to be a homebrew community project, and might as well start here. As I've discussed elsewhere, there's some tough choices that have to be made updating Tomb Kings for Age of Sigmar, that mostly boil down to a single question - are you trying to directly translate the oldhammer tomb kings into AoS rules, or are you trying to adapt the army to fit into the AoS setting? Direct Translation Focus on Oldhammer Lore (nehekhara, mortuary cult ) and Characters (Settra, Khalida, etc) Mostly if not entirely anti-Nagash, and almost entirely separated from other undead factions. As such not part of Grand Alliance Death, probably not part of any Grand Alliance since they aren't part of the AoS setting. Basically a 'Legends +' ruleset in that sense, a stand alone army not part of any alliance and not part of the current lore, but with the additions of modern AoS style faction rules and points values to be playable in pitched battle games - at least those where your opponent is open to homebrew content. Keep all previous units, serving more or less the same roles that they did in the 8e / Compendium armies, only changing mechanics from the current rule set where those mechanics don't really work due to changes in AoS core rules or faction design Conceptual or mechanical overlap with existing Deathrattle & Ossiarch units wouldn't matter much since this version of the Tomb Kings would be entirely stand alone regardless. Adaptation Re-imagine the faction to fit into the modern Age of Sigmar setting, including brand new history and characters As an undead faction they would be mostly if not entirely servants of Nagash. They might be rebellious and unreliable servants, similar to the Flesh Eater Courts, but Nagash isn't just 'the great necromancer' in AoS, he's the literal god of death and undeath and an anti-Nagash undead faction doesn't really fit with the setting. So a proper Grand Alliance: Death faction, potentially with allies among the other factions, letting you bring in the modern versions of surviving Nehekharan characters including Arkhan and Neferata. Since you're already adapting the lore and narrative, you open up space to adapt or rethink the units as well. Maybe Carrion, Tomb Scorpions, and Tomb Swarms are endless spells instead of units. Maybe the Casket of Souls is free faction terrain. Maybe you don't need to keep /all/ the old units. Maybe you come up with a few new ones, or combine some units with similar units that exist elsewhere in the AoS line - Do Tomb Kings and Wight Kings, Tomb Guard and Grave Guard, or Skeleton Warriors and Skeleton Legionnaires /really/ need to be separate units? Of these two possible design directions, Direct Translation is by far the easier one - since most choices have already been made for you - and the one that would probably best satisfy the old school TK players who just want a functional ruleset to keep playing their existing models in the current game. In my opinion, however, Adaptation is by far the more interesting direction, with the most potential, and were it to catch on it would be the version most likely to attract interest and attention outside of die hard TK king players. Personally, I'm much more excited by the idea of a version of a community TK project where the army can be a proud part of a larger AoS undead collection and combined Grand Alliance Death coalition. In the interest of spit balling ideas, here's my initial draft take on lore for a version of TK adapted for AoS: lore/history ... Subfactions: These newly emerged Deathrattle Dynasties fall into 4 distinct groups: ... Special Characters: .... Some general design ideas: ... So that's my loose, overlong pitch for a version of a homebrew TK tome that tries to update the faction to the current lore and general design principles of AoS rather than just directly translating the oldhammer army into the current ruleset. IMO it holds onto the feel & principles of the army while carving out a space where they could still fit in the lore, and also explaining away the hodge podge of different miniature styles that a new player would have to resort to as representing different civilizations or different ages of the same civilization. It has some ideas for what some old favorite characters could be up to while also making room for some new ones, and gives the surviving Nehekharan named characters a way to tie to the faction as well. Any thoughts? Does anyone else think adaptation is the right direction, and either likes these ideas or has other ideas on how to do it that might be better? Or is the entire endeavor a waste of time, and direct translation keeping as much to the prior tomb kings lore and rules the way to go, since the main point of such a project would be to let existing tomb kings players keep playing their existing armies, and anyone who wanted something more different and modern can already just play Legions of Nagash or Ossiarch Bonereapers?
  5. Sception

    Ossiarch Tiny-Reapers

    I'm fine with the size of stalkers, immortis, the crawler, and the heroes, for the most part. But yeah, I really would have preferred morteks to be larger, 2 wound infantry on 32 mm bases equivalent in size to stormcasts and fielded in units of 5 to 20 instead of 10 to 30, even if that meant the models being more expensive, and for kavalos to be similarly upsized. The larger scale would have fit with Ossiarchs being a match for stormcasts. It also would have made them much more distinct from deathrattle units, so the two forces wouldn't step on each other's toes mechanically and aesthetically. It would have been easier to keep both around, though the OBR lore would still need to be a bit different. I'm still happy with the look of the army as they are, though. More of a minor nitpick to me than a major sticking point.
  6. Sception

    Old Black Magic

    After a fair bit of fumbling around with the blog interface (is there a way to delete a blog entry? The best I could find was "unpublishing"), I believe I've successfully managed to start a proper tga hobby blog to chronicle my quest to get an actual army painted for the new prize of my collection to lead. The second entry includes a pole for whether I'll start with Ossiarchs, Legions, or Tomb Kings, as described above. I'm really equally split on all three, so a nudge in any direction (or even suggestions for alternative paths) would be quite welcome.
  7. So I want to paint up a 1,000 point starter army for Arkhan to lead, but Arkhan can be used in a lot of armies - Bonereapers, Legions, and Grand Alliance Death. Plus in Tomb Kings armies 'Arkhan on a Chariot' has officially been run as Settra or 'Tomb King on Exalted Chariot' since the Compendium days, so there's yet another way to run him. And my shame pile is sufficiently massive that I could easily put together any of these lists, and honestly I like all of them, and hope one day to paint all this junk, so the question is less 'which will I try to paint' and more 'which will I try to paint first', which I guess I'll throw up a pole for here and see if anyone has suggestions for me. Here are the options I'm looking at right now: ... Null Myriad ... Legion of Sacrament ... Tomb Kings ... So those are the three options I'm looking at, and really I do like all of them equally, I think, and if I can sustain the effort I'd probably try to get all three done before expanding any one army out towards the standard 2k range. But that's putting the cart way before the horse, I have to get at least one of these three done before I worry about what I'll do after, so which one do you think I should start with?
  8. ~ I got that Old Black Magic, rolling in ~ More Pics: Work in Progress: After a year of mostly not working on it, I've finally finished painting my old school Arkhan on flying chariot conversion. I'm honestly really quite happy with it. Now I just need an army for him to lead. I'm not lacking the models for it, I’ve got like 20,000 points of warhammer undead in varying states of assembly & painting, but shamefully I only have exactly 5 fully painted models. ~ behold, the entirety of my collection, if you only count the stuff I've finished painting ~ Every couple years I’d throw together a ‘manageable starter army’ from the shame pile and pretend like I’m going to get it painted. And I'll make some progress, but never actually finish anything, and that’s probably how things are going to go this time too, after all it’s not like I don’t have four or five other projects waiting on hold, but w/e, finishing my Arkhan conversion has me feeling motivated, so I’m ready to try again. This blog seems a good enough way to track my progress.
  9. It seems both official work on tomb kings is done - their points aren't even up on warscroll builder anymore - and Mengel doesn't seem like they're working on their version any time soon. Which means that if work is to continue on it, it would require some other community individual or group to take up the work. Which could happen - the Chaos Dwarf online player base famously managed to maintain a homebrew army book so well considered that a number of major tournaments allowed its use, which was likely what pushed GW to eventually put out the updated FW version of their rules. So that sort of project is technically possible. Unfortunately, the Tomb Kings community is a lot less active and coherent now than the Chaos Dwarf community was then. The largest dedicated TK community I'm personally aware of - the Tomb Kings of Khemri forum on tapatalk (https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/khemri/) is something of a ghost town. There may be communities on facebook, reddit, or twitter, but I'm not personally terribly familiar with them. Another issue is that what community does exist for Tomb Kings seem to want different things. Some people want a direct translation of oldhammer units and lore, despite the fact that the oldhammer version of the Tomb Kings doesn't exactly fit very well into the Age of Sigmar setting, particularly when it domes to their opposition to Nagash. In WHFB Nagash was a powerful necromancer, but diminished from the peak of his power such that he could not control the Tomb Kings. In AoS, Nagash's power is far greater than it ever was in the old world, he is the god of Death and Undeath, and no faction of the undead could truely oppose him like Settra and the Tomb Kings used to. So you either update and re-imagine the Tomb Kings as a pro-Nagash faction to fit with the setting, something that wouldn't fit well with a lot of the old school players who you'd be counting on to supply the motivation for this project, or you effectively have to shift them to the Order alliance, and adding a bunch of undead units to the already overpopulated Order alliance doesn't feel like the right move either. And then there's how you treat the units. Copy and paste compendium rules and points to try and maintain as much overlap with official rules as possible? Or start re-working units from the ground up to be more in line with modern AoS design? Which again comes down to keeping the old stuff as much as possible or redesigning it to fit into the new setting. Both philosophies - direct translation of rules & fluff or revision of both to fit the current game's narrative and mechanics - have serious difficulties. Direct translation will result in a faction that still doesn't work well mechanically and still doesn't fit in the setting. But adaptation causes the project to lose a lot of it's appeal to classical players. And, if we're being honest, if you're trying to adapt a modern AoS version of the tomb kings, you're going to start overlapping an awful lot with OBR in terms of units and themes. Personally I'd still lean towards adaptation to the modern paradigm, but I was never a 'classic' tomb kings player, I was a nagash-worshipping/arkhan-following-undead-legion type tomb king player to begin with, so adaptation wouldn't be forcing me to compromise my own vision of the army. These are issues that didn't hamper the old chaos dwarf community. The setting and core game rules hadn't left them behind the same way. The spot chaos dwarves occupied in the narrative was still there for them to occupy, and mechanically nothing in the game had appeared since they were dropped to supplant their position. They also had a much easier time with models. Even when GW wasn't making chaos dwarf models, it was quite easy to field 'good enough' equivalents of their entire line with some goblin models, dwarf and empire war machines, and dwarf models with chaos-warrior head swaps. About the hardest thing to find workable counts as options for were their big flying monsters (no big deal, big flying monsters didn't work well in WHFB at the time anyway) and their bull centaurs, and even the latter could be reasonably built out of boar bodies, dwarf upper torsos, and chaos dwarf heads, with some green stuff to fill gaps. The Tomb Kings are a lot harder to run counts as. Yes, you've got skeletons and wights, and the OBR line gets you catapults and stalkers - which can be used to convert ushabti. But what about Sphinxes and Chariots? GW hardly even makes chariots anymore. Most are way too distinctive to use in skeleton chariot conversions. Probably the closest workable option is the 'Khandish King in Chariot' Hobbit/LotR model, which is likely too small to work for a fantasy chariot and even if it does work who knows how long it's going to stay around? What about Sphinxes? No real good options there, either. Those are like /the/ iconic units for the faction, so it's hard to justify working on the army when people will have a hard time getting their hands on those units to field them. I don't think these are insurmountable hurdles to overcome, but the decisions necessary to do so run the risk of splitting the already tenuous community of those who are still interested in tomb kings, still interested in running them in age of sigmar, and are interested in and able to use homebrew rules to do so. I personally could be interested in contributing to such a project, but only if I thought it might have some legs to it. Even with the Mengel Miniatures book as a starting point, updating that to 2e would still be a lot of work to put into a project if only a couple people might ever use it.
  10. Thank you. In addition the question regarding whether 'unique' scenery with warscrolls use their warscroll rules in addition to the random effect has been answered by the GHB designer's commentary here: https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/66ywBB8J1iRGh4t9.pdf Not the answer I wanted to hear. Particularly combined with the above pdf of rules for the official scenery, where most of the named terrain is particularly drab and uninteresting both visually and mechanically, and when the expanded lists of random terrain effects are padded out with a lot more drab filler effects, such that most of the time terrain isn't actually doing anything at all. Disappointing, certainly. And if they were only going to keep one generic woods terrain, imo it should have been the citadel woods, as you'd then be able to visual distinguish it from the faction specific version of the Wyldwood. But whatever, an answer is still an answer, even if it isn't one that I personally like.
  11. I haven't played the 2020 version of Meeting Engagements, but the 2019 version was unfortunately dominated by big flying monster cheese, something OBR can't really compete with due to a lack of such units. I'm not sure if anything about the 2020 version would change that.
  12. I'm just kind if frustrated that they wrote OBR with so many ward saves to begin with, they had to know the restriction to only one at a time was coming.
  13. Sception

    Old Black Magic

    ~ I've got that Old Black Magic rolling in ~ Old School Arkhan conversion is done! Not the cleanest paint job ever, but I'm none the less very proud of this guy. Very much what I was aiming for. Arkhan’s really a corner stone of my collection, since the same dude can lead my Legions of Nagash, Ossiarch Bonereapers, and Tomb Kings, so I’m really pleased to have him done. I don’t really have a lot to say about him now that he is done, though. Process was a pain, especially redoing significant portions due to spray varnish frosting. Definitely need a better set up for taking these pictures. As for what armies he'll be leading, I'm working on a few small lists, including: Null Myriad EDIT: I wrote a bit about the other two lists, so might as well say my piece with these as well. Obviously before the Petrifex nerf I would have wanted to run Arkhan with them, and I'm honestly kind of kicking myself that I didn't have this model done for the OBR release. I started the project more than a year ago, it could have been ready by then, and then I would have had the chance to play Arkhan during a brief period when he wasn't just kind of bad. Oh, well. I guess you could still run team up Katakros/Arkhan lists in mortis praetorians, though I was always skeptical of that many points sunk into heroes, and in any event I don't own Katakros and probably won't for a while. So anyway, yeah, with the petrifex nerfed, if I'm going to be a filthy casual and run Arkhan at all it might as well be in his persional legion the Null Myriad. As for the list, after Arkhan and some Morteks and Kavalos to fill battleline there's points left over for exactly one of the OBR's many roughly 200 point special units. A Liege, Crawler, or Harvester would probably be the best choice, but I went with a unit of Immortis to deploy next to Arkhan in the hopes that they might help him survive the first turn. Their recent points decrease leaves the list with 20 points spare, but nothing really to spend it on. I suppose I could pick up the carrion endless spell, but I'm skeptical of casting bound spells with arkhan - they eat into his casting bonus, which is one of the main reasons to field him at all. So instead the list just sits on the 20 point deficit and hopes to pick up a triumph out of it. On the other hand, my Liege is more painted than my Immortis squad are, so I might waffle on this one a bit. ... Grand Host of Nagash EDIT: Legion of Sacrament EDIT: Obviously Arkhan, like any of the three classic mortarchs, is better off in a Grand Host army, where they don't have to be your general, and originally this post had such a list. But honestly, I'm so proud of this conversion that I don't care. He's the centerpiece of my army, he deserves to be the general even if it's a bad idea, and deserves to be leading his own personal legion. I don't play often enough to care about winning or losing anyway, especially during covid, so yeah, here's a revised list that uses the Sacrament rules and runs a Necromancer on a Balewind and a second unit of 5 dire wolves instead of the original list's wight king and 5 black knights. I already have the necromancer and balewind painted, and the second squad of dire wolves are closer to completion than any of my black knights, so this is a list that can be finished sooner, too. ... Tomb Kings (Grand Alliance: Death) I could technically run Arkhan /as/ Arkhan in the tomb king list, since it's a generic Death army, but 'arkhan on chariot' has officially counted as Settra/TKoEC in AoS since the compendium days, and Arkhan doesn't work so great outside of OBR lately, so yeah, exalted chariot it is. That said, TKoEC doesn't exactly work properly in 2e AoS either, but whatever. Short of a homebrew TK battletome, which I don't have the energy to write right now, there's no fixing it. I know Mengel Miniatures put a very nice homebrew tome together, but that was also never updated for 2e AoS, so, shrug. TK rules are awkward right now, but they've got a bunch of cool unique units so I still like to run them every once in a while. EDIT: As an interesting alternative to the above list, I could ditch the prince and the legionnaires to pick up another three chariots plus three necropolis knights, for a weird, fast, high recursion sort of list. That could be cool, but it would lack objective grabbing ability and board presence, and would feel pretty lopsided. Plus, while I have the parts to put together my necropolis knight conversions, actually making them would take /ages/, where as the legionnaires can pull double shifts in this and the legions of nagash list, which makes this list a lot more attainable. ... Maybe I'll throw together a proper project blog to work on one of the above lists. I haven't messed with that functionality of this site yet, would be a good excuse.
  14. Azyr's just being weird. App's good for referencing rules & scrolls, but the list builder's not the best. Warscroll-builder or battlescribe are both better gor that, imo.
  15. Been working on my own Arkhan, mount's mostly done but haven't finished the rider yet. So yeah, I wanted *a* Petrifex nerf, if not one this bad, but I'm still quite sad that I didn't finish this project in time to get it on the table in the brief window when he was actually good.
×
×
  • Create New...