Jump to content

Sception

Members
  • Posts

    2,200
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by Sception

  1. I love them. Will definitely have to pick this one up.
  2. there was also this one: As far as I know, this one hasn't been identified yet, and imo it could easily be the right hand of the same model as the left hand with sword above. If that's the case, we're talking about a bare-armed, clawed, gaunt-but-muscly figure, sitting in a crumbling throne holding a skull with one hand and a worn sword in the other. To me, this kind of screams 'Flesh Eater Courts special character', and could even be a model for the Carrion King himself. CK or no, a ghoul king on a throne w/ a more regal pose would do a better job of selling the FEC delusions narrative than any of the existing models. Likewise, whether or not it's the Carrion King, a FEC special character could do a lot to raise their profile in the game's lore. Currently the lack of any central personalities to follow is, imo, one of the reasons the FEC faction doesn't get as much attention in the narrative as it deserves, and the lack of narrative attention contributes to a lack of community hype. That's why, as long as my wish list for new FEC models is (plastic varghulf! actual models for the other courtiers! court mage ghoul wizard type! corpse-cart-esque banquet wagon! dire wolves, fell bats, and bat swarms! ghouls riding dire wolves or fell bats cavalry! new crypt ghouls with more upright posing and scraps of armor, cloth, & ragged weapons to indicate their deluded self image!), at the very top of that list is new FEC special characters to sell their faction narrative and drive their presence in the overall game narrative. Give us the Carrion King! If ghouls effectively think they're brettonians, give us ghoulified takes on Brettonian special characters! Maybe the ghoul equivalent of a green night who appears in various FEC communities during their time of need? Maybe a ghoul equivalent of the fey enchantress who seems sane and travels from one FEC community to another tending to them and temporarily easing their madness? Or maybe something crazy and new. Maybe a Gargant that has succumbed to the FEC delusions, or an Ogor chieftan who ate an abhorrant and was corrupted by it's version of the soulblight curse, becoming an Ogor ghoul king? I don't care what form it takes, but this faction imo needs headline personalities more than anything else. Hopefully GW's designers will use Nagash's well deserved nap as an excuse to bring all sorts of weird and interesting FEC personalities out of the woodwork. After all, of all the death factions, FEC are probably the ones that are the best fit in personality, temperament, and aesthetic for 3e's focus on the Realm of Beasts.
  3. Most start collecting boxes aren't that great. If the eventual OBR start collecting box looks like our half of feast of bones, I wouldn't really recommend bothering with it. Maybe get one if you like all the units, but you'll never want more than one of the special character, even the one is purely for display shelf reasons as he's terrible in game right now, and the rest? 1 box morghasts, 1 box stalkers, and half a box of morteks? Again, one set might be worth while, but you're probably not going to build an effective army out of multiples of that. The broken realms box, if you can get it, is absolutely worth picking up one of for a new player, much more than the obr half of feast of bones, but even that you don't need multiples of it because you don't need multiple lieges, and once you have the one the BR box doesn't really save you anything vs. just buying the kav units separately, not unless you think you can sell the spare liege on the secondary market. I have a hard time imagining an OBR start collecting box that GW would be inclined to put out that would also be an effective way of building up armies. Even if it were something like 10-20 morteks, 5 kavalos, and a hero, we just don't have any heroes we want to run multiples of, yet they're all expensive enough that they would eat up the discount of a start collecting box, so once you had the hero getting more of the box wouldn't save you much vs. just buying the units separately, especially with how aggressively morteks are already priced. And that's an ideal situation, you could easily end up with something like the Soulblight SC, which, I mean, it's ok if you need the graveguard, but an awful lot of soulblight players are going to have a hard time making use of one of those boxes, let alone multiple. Things might change with new units, but yeah. As is, I just don't see a start collecting box doing much to change the landscape for new OBR players.
  4. The prices of ~most of~ the models in the army are quite high, but so are the points costs, which means the price of the ~overall army~ isn't that bad. And the overall army price is brought down further by the one exception to the 'high priced' trend - mortek guard. While mortek spam is less of a thing in 3e than it was in 2e (points cost up, no max unit discount, max unit down, reinforcements restricted, smaller unit sizes in the game in general making 5 man kavalos units a more attractive battle line option than they were in 2e, new CA restrictions make it harder to stack buffs like morteks used to like to do which further skews attention towards the less RDP hungry kavalos), most OBR armies are still going to have Morteks taking up a larger portion of the overall points value of the army than anything else, and compared to other equivalent units Mortarks are surprisingly cheap. Fully half the price per model of the equivalent lumineth core battleline units, and not appreciably less elite than they are in points cost or tabletop effectiveness. Mortek Guard could have been the same price for 10 models instead of 20 and people wouldn't have griped any more about them than any other elite infantry kit in the game. As is, they're cheaper per model than some hoardy chaff units in other armies. They're the same price per model as deathrattle skeletons, only barely more than deadwalker zombies, and significantly cheaper than chainrasp hordes, and this goes a long way towards making the cost of collecting an OBR army much more manageable than it might at first appear, even without a start collecting set.
  5. I doubt we'll see a new book soon, and good for it. The more time that passes, the more chance of the design team moving away from the early 3e faction design paradigm. The stormcast and orruk books aren't weak or boring, not if you stick to the new units anyway, but the flagrant difference in not just power level (that could be fixed with later points cost revisions) but effort and interesting rules between the new and old warscrolls is downright alarming, and the lack of depth to the faction and subfaction rules means you get your mechanical depth from your warscrolls in these books or you just don't get any. I really don't like it. When SBGL came out, I really thought we were a preview of what to expect from faction rules in 3e, especially with how some of our unit rules only made sense in the context of 3e core rules (eg 'Riders of Ruin' on the blood knights) - and I was pretty happy about that. I thought the gravelords set a pretty solid precedent for a cool faction where nearly all of the units were interesting, had some clear effort put in by the designers (SBGL does a better job of making skeletons and zombies distinct units that are each worth fielding in their own right than any previous warhammer undead faction ruleset). Yeah, Black Knights are a bit of a dud, and maybe a couple of the Ulfenkarn characters, but that's, what, a couple units out of a couple dozen? Right now I'm just hoping the design of the Stormcast and Orruk books are a fluke, that they're weird because GW's trying to push the starter set stuff, and doesn't want new players why buy in to feel like they have to go chasing a bunch of old stuff to make their armies work. Either way, the sooner GW moves away from these two the better. In particular, I'm hoping we're off of this design style by the time the next Nighthaunt book is released, because they in particular really need and deserve a better ruleset this time around.
  6. You could maybe try using some combination of gravesite deployment, deep striking vargheists, fast threats like Manny/Vlozd/Venga with pinions, and outflanking blood knights via LoNight or Kastelai rules to try to surround them? Can't jump out of charge range of /everything/ if the entire table is within charge range of /something/. It's a bit of a stretch though, admittedly. Honestly, they're kind of dumb, and I do personally prefer the casual/narrative answer of just saying 'please don't run four'.
  7. The Original Post has been updated with a new version including the following changes: cleaned up some wording removed the option to field morghasts. Yeah, they kind of should be there, but they kind of should be in the LoBlood and LoNight subfactions too, and they aren't there either, and as much as possible I want this optional lineage to conform to the design of the official lineages. Black Disciples casting bonus changed from 'Necromancers' to 'Deathmages', in order to apply to new homebrew deathmage units. Corpse geometries changed from a flat +1 on the Endless Legions roll to re-roll 1's on the same roll after official SBGL errata changed Endless Legions to happen at the end of every battleshock phase instead of just your battleshock phase, making the previous version of the battle trait twice as effective as I had intended it to be. Asylumaticae restricted to 'Deathmages' instead of 'Necromancers' to account for new homebres Deathmage units, & it's effects changed (end of hero phase, once per battle), to make it a little clearer, reduce it's power slightly, and distinguish it from other similar items. Shroud of Darkness removed entirely, as I was having difficulty writing a version that was consistent with other 3e design, meaningfully distinct from the Wristbands of Black Gold, and not overpowered. In it's place I added 'Liche-Lord's Staff', which lets the bearer cast an extra spell and multi-cast arcane bolt, in imitation of Arkhan's staff. This also helps lean the artefacts more towards the faction's spellcasting theme. Warscroll Battalion changed to incorporate the new homebrew units, and to avoid awkward wording trying allow LoSacrament armies to include Arkhan in the formation while preventing other SBGL subfactions from using the battalion to backdoor arkhan into non LoSacrament armies. This does break from SBGL design precedent in that the other subfactions don't have unique battalions of their own, but warscroll Battalions in general are narrative-only now, so I'm not too bothered about it. Added two new homebrew hero units: The 'Sacramental Liche-Lord' is my first draft take on the long desired 'Necromancer on Mortis Engine" hero, meant to fill the roll of centerpiece general for SBGL armies that prefer deathmages over vampires. It's basically a mortis engine that is also a double-cast wizard, with the Reliquary as a spell instead of a 1/battle ability. The Reliquary spell starts off difficult to cast since it is emulating a powerful, 1/game ability on an existing unit, but gets easier to cast as the unit takes damage similar to how older versions of the reliquary rule got stronger in later turns of the game. The 'Soulblight Arcanovore' is an option for a more LoSacramenty, death-magicky, Necrarch-style vampire lord. Regular Vampire Lord stats, but lower save, weaker weapon, no command ability in exchange for double-cast/unbind and the Deathmage keyword. For thematic reasons, I replaced the normal 'hunger' ability with the 'arcane hunger' variant, and gave the unit a signature spell that complements the magic-eating theme. The hero is meant to provide a midpoint caster hero inbetween regular necromancers and the big centerpiece models like Arkhan or the Sacramental Liche-Lord above. The homebrew units are both at the first draft stage, and I would greatly appreciate suggestions and feedback on any aspect of them - concepts, stats, abilities, signature spells, point costs, and whatever other notes you might have. In particular, do these units successfully fill the gaps of "large centerpiece general for necromancer-theme armies that don't want to run named characters" and "spellcaster specialist vampire infantry hero"? If not, what changes do you think they need to fit those gaps? Would you be tempted to run them in a LoSacrament army using these rules? If these rules were official, would you be tempted to run them in other bloodlines, even though they wouldn't benefit from subfaction rules? Do you think they step on the toes of any units that already exist in the book? Apart from the new units and the warscroll battalion, which are still in an early and entirely untested, the rest is getting pretty close to finished. Once the rules are at a finalized state I'll move on to start putting together a proper PDF, including putting out a call for anyone with old Necrarch & Legion of Sacrament armies who might want to contribute pictures of their models.
  8. I think 3e's number of terrain pieces is enough, but I do wish they did more in general. More vision obstruction, more cover, more impediments to movement, etc. The die roll for a random affect that doesn't usually affect as that much doesn't really do it for me. I've heard 40k has better terrain rules in 9th, if that's true then it's too bad they weren't ported over. Another problem is terrain GW actually makes. The 'forest' is three trees without even a surface to put them on. The available 'buildings' are all pretty small and flimsy, and either ruined or with construction barely started. No official hills, or water bodies. No currently available fortifications or castle walls. No larger, multileveled structures, complete or otherwise. No elevated walkways or bridges. The graveyard kit is pretty good, and there's a bunch of faction-specific pieces that are all at least interesting to look at if not to move around on. But GW only seems motivated to write rules for discrete first party terrain models, and their current selection outside of faction terrain is threadbare and unexciting. Which is a shame, since AoS's setting absolutely supports exciting terrain offerings in the narrative. outcrops of living rock, carniverous plants, upside-down floating pyramids, ancient overgrown city walls and ruins, rivers of water, ice, lava, or magical energy, etc. You can scratch build some of that stuff yourself, but since GW doesn't make it the game rules don't support it. It's even more frustrating, because GW /used/ to make a lot of decent terrain. Basic modular hill and forest kits (the current kit is, if anything a /downgrade/ from the citadel woods), a somewhat bland but serviceable castle, the big impressive khorne skull hill, a whole bunch of cool, large buildings like the watchtower and the fortified manse and the epic Skullvane Manse. Even some of the more exciting early AoS terrain like the khornate fortifications and the dragonfate dias are gone. The stormvault stuff isn't terrible, even if it isn't as good, but I doubt even that will be here long. Most of the warcry scenery was already unavailable back when the 2020 GHB made it near about the only scenery with official matched play rules support that season. It's honestly kind of dire.
  9. Sadly a lot of what used to make soulblight units useful allies for nighthaunts is gone. I think you could make a solid case for Vengorian Lords, with their debuff aura and Nighthuant's lack of good monster options. The Crimson Court are a vanity unit even in Soulblight, though. You take them because the models are amazing and you want to show them off, not because you expect them to do anything, and they can do that just as well as allies in a Nighthaunt list.
  10. I'm glad to have at least saved someone some of the hassle I went through. Honestly, I still wish they had done a new grave guard kit and left the existing skeletons alone. The old skittle kit was still fine, imo, and in particular chopped up into piles of miscellaneous bones and skulls to use on bases & such well, where the new skeleton kit just doesn't. As a unit, the new kit looks better than the old kit, sure, but the grave guard warranted the upgrade more. Oh, well.
  11. Kainan's Reapers aren't amazing in and of themselves, but they are a very nice for their points cost, and fill a useful niche.
  12. I don't mind the claw change. You put it on necromancers. That bonk branch wasn't doing anything anyway.
  13. flaming weapon allowed for mounts, but generic spells (and prayers) aren't allowed for unique heroes at all.
  14. If you follow the more restrictive interpretation it breaks soulblight subfactions altogether, as you would be required to take not just one /of/ the subfaction's command traits / artefacts, but rather /each individual/ command trait and artefact within the subfaction. Ie, taking Pack Alpha as the command trait for your Vyrkos general would be illegal, because "Spoor Tracker" is also "a" command trait made available by the Vyrkos subfaction and thus your general would be required to take "that" command trait. You would be required to take each and every command trait and artefact made available by your subfaction, and thus wouldn't be allowed to take any, and thus Soulblight Lists would be illegal if they take any generic heroes at all. The rule needs errata, and sadly it didn't get it in the new go round, at least not that I initially noticed. I expect that when we get proper clarification (not custserv responses, which are not official and can be contradictory) that yeah, you'll be required to take "one of" the options from your subfaction, just because kneejerk faq/errata tends to be more restrictive, but right now imo the only internally consistent interpretation that doesn't break anything is that the core rule only applies to subfactions that only have one command trait and artefact each. Which makes sense, since those subfactions were written with the assumption that faction armies didn't use subfactions by default, and thus accessing a subfaction should come with some sort of additional cost or restriction. That's simply not the case in the Soulblight Book, so the restriction really doesn't make any sense, but there you go.
  15. WHOOOOOO RELENTLESS DISCIPLINE FIX!!!!!! I mean, also, yeah, boo arkhan nerf, and yay elite status for the monstrous infantry, but we knew those changes had to be coming sooner rather than later, but YEAH! RDP FIX! I honestly thought we'd have to wait for a new battletome to see that. The Relentless Discipline situation is still much, much weaker than it was in 2e since we still cant stack multiple buffs from or onto the same unit in the same phase, and I might have preferred an alternative fix that just gave us access to the core command abilities, but at the very least Unstoppable Advance works again.
  16. They look alright, but in a couple cases I had to pry apart half-set plastic glue to move legs that seemed like they sorta fit one torso to the torso that they actually fit because the legs that were supposed to fit the first torso didn't fit the second at all. The pieces have little numbered tabs on the sprues to help you identify which bit the instructions are referring to, but usually I just clip and clean all the bits first, and just go by the pictures in the instructions to identify which to grab later, and that's just a bad idea with this skeleton kit. Even if you're grabbing bits from the sprue one at a time when the instructions call for them, they're still crammed close together and it can sometimes be difficult to tell which number is referring to what bit. Basically, if the hips don't fit between the front and balk halves of the upper torso bits /perfectly/, if it seems like the fit's a bit too snug or like you have to force something at all, then you probably have the wrong hip/leg bits and need to double check. The arms and heads on this kit are ~somewhat~ interchangeable. Some of the torsos have chain bits over the neck that need to connect to particular helmets, some of the arms are at wonky angles that don't work with some of the torsos, but you can mix and match a bit for these if you're careful and make sure you know where everything goes before you glue anything, but the torsos and legs aren't interchangeable at all. Honestly, there's enough variety in the standard models/poses that just following the directions carefully is the way to go, imo.
  17. Just be very careful to follow the directions, & make sure you're grabbing the right parts. It can be easy to confuse the legs especially & they are NOT interchangeable.
  18. If gotrek specifically is bothering you, you might consider trying to find room for the Soulsnare Shackles. With his low base movement it's not to hard to prevent him from charging at all on a key turn, provided the opponent fails to dispel them.
  19. 20 zombies is basically a sacrificial screen. Pop them up from a graveyard as a screen for 20 great weapon graveguard 2.1 inches behind. If you want them to be more than a speed bump, though, then yeah, 40+.
  20. A (one) artefact or command trait isn't the same as multiple artefacts or command traits. This distinction isn't just pedantry, it's /necessary/ for the rule to be functional at all. Take the example of a Vyrkos faction with a single generic hero/general in the list, and try to read the rule as applying:
  21. GW's just not very consistent about scale, especially since they ditched square base rank & flank in oldhammer for skirmishy round bases in AoS. Bigger models means more room for fancy details that the largest rival miniature manufacturers just can't match, especially not in plastics, so GW's scale in general has been creeping up, and creeping up faster for heroes and low model count elite units. These days it's more surprising when a unit /isn't/ way bigger than the game's supposed official scale. Mortek Guard, for instance, are comparative weenies, noticeably smaller than most other recent infantry units of their base size, including the new skeleton warriors.
  22. Glad to see a fellow fan of the classics! It really looks fantastic.
  23. If you're using the standard zombie dragon & rider model & want the rider to be removeable, you don't even need a pin or magnet. In fact, I'd specifically recommend NOT using a pin. The armor of the rider and saddle on the dragon are shaped in such a way that the rider fits and stays snuggly in place without any glue or other bond already, and in fact has to slide in at a bit of a tilt and angle that a pin would obstruct, potentially leading to a damage paint job as you remove and replace the model over time. Magnets wouldn't cause the same problem, but really shouldn't be necessary either. As for the list... eh, it looks fine. IMO it's not worth worrying about how well early stages of an escalation list play since it won't be long until you're expanding anyway. As long as the stuff you're painting will still be decent later you're fine. Personally, though, if I were playing in an escalation league I'd also use the opportunity to combine that with a Path to Glory. I mean, might as well, right? But that would involve fielding at least one non-unique character to be your warlord.
  24. For some strange reason soulblight got kicked over to a separate forum for 3e. Try over here: https://www.tga.community/forums/forum/174-soulblight-gravelords/
×
×
  • Create New...