Seems we're getting our Khorn out of the way but I'm glad to see they are continuing the theme of combining the Chaos Factions into one tome.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/03/19/coming-to-the-mortal-realms-this-april/

Looking forward to this if they can actually make khorne competitive against stormcast. Right now I don't feel that its a very fun game when those two factions meet up on the table... very one sided.

 auticus wrote:
Looking forward to this if they can actually make khorne competitive against stormcast. Right now I don't feel that its a very fun game when those two factions meet up on the table... very one sided.

There aren't many matchups for Khorne to have fun with right now. Hopefully they'll give us some more mobility and some reliable source of Mortal Wounds.

I too hope they upgrade KBB. I remember that time I fought them with my ironjawz... goodness gracious, a unit of goregruntas deleted a third of his army!

Yeah really as I look at the army the main thing that it is lacking badly is the ability to push out *edit: a SHED LOAD of * mortal wounds *edit: like stormcast and other armies have units that can do*

Because of that, the melee army gets out melee'd by anything that has the ability to push out a ton of mortal wounds.

I'm sure they'll put in a few new formations, but the real make or break will be the allegiance specific rule. Something that is entirely possible is Blood Tithe-esque rules from Khorne Daemonkin, which they may actually go with. I don't know how well that will go for summoning though, you know having to pay for summons and all that. Just speculation.

A massive unit of Bloodletters pumps out an insane amount of Mortal Wounds if buffed and whipped. Some top tournament players have picked it up recently. The only problem is it requires Sayl to throw the unit around the board, so I would say the most crucial thing needed in the new book is movement shenanigans rather than more options for Mortal Wounds output.

 Bottle wrote:
A massive unit of Bloodletters pumps out an insane amount of Mortal Wounds if buffed and whipped. Some top tournament players have picked it up recently. The only problem is it requires Sayl to throw the unit around the board, so I would say the most crucial thing needed in the new book is movement shenanigans rather than more options for Mortal Wounds output.

Bloodletters are all well and good, but I'd like to be able to use Blood Warriors and Bloodreavers and not get laughed off the table.

Khorne has a lot of unit options but a comparatively tiny amount of ways to build a viable army. Aside from plastic flesh hounds this is the one release Khorne really needed.

 EnTyme wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
A massive unit of Bloodletters pumps out an insane amount of Mortal Wounds if buffed and whipped. Some top tournament players have picked it up recently. The only problem is it requires Sayl to throw the unit around the board, so I would say the most crucial thing needed in the new book is movement shenanigans rather than more options for Mortal Wounds output.

Bloodletters are all well and good, but I'd like to be able to use Blood Warriors and Bloodreavers and not get laughed off the table.

Russ Veal, the UK master, cites Blood Warriors as his favourite unit in the game and rate Bloodreavers too. I've heard they are really good but haven't got my Bloodbound on the table just yet.

I've played 8 games of AoS with my Bloodbound against Stormcast. I'm on 5 wins to 3 losses. I don't know if that's bad or not but I'm happy with it. However I definitely feel like I'm playing as the underdogs so hopefully this book will be a boost. If they've combining the mortals and demons into one faction then I'll be doubly happy.

If the book requires you to max out one type of unit to be competitive, its not a good book.

So stating that khorne is just fine because Bloodletters can be a great unit if buffed up and then a certain special character exists as well doesn't really work for me.

Especially when you look at things like beastclaw and soul maces which push out exponentially more damage and don't require any external buffings due to their internal rules.

The army as a whole falls short on their damage output, which is why you don't notice them in many tournament events. I've not heard of any (i don't go to the UK so I can't speak for that but I have not heard of any UK players that are dominating with them either).

Pulling math - **without buffs** and the numbers represent the average wounds by a warscroll selection against all saves (so no save, vs 6+, vs 5+ etc then averaged)
Reavers do 3.46 wounds
Blood Warriors are at 5.81
Bloodletters are 5.01 or 5.79 if near a hero

Stormcast retributors are on par with Blood Warriors (good) but the things I see maxed out:
Retributors with starsoul maces 13.08 wounds


Beastclaw raiders 13.62 wounds

Significant difference. I suppose giving Khorne a unit that can do around 10 or so wounds a turn on average would be good enough to appease me.

Movement exploits would be a bonus since both the stormcast and the beastclaw raiders ALSO have that going for them as well whereas Khorne just gets to walk across the table praying to 6lb 4oz baby-khorne-jesus that they can make it into contact against a missile heavy opponent.

I am guessing Slaughterpriests will become an important feature because the new prayers will provide Khorne with tools it doesn't otherwise have.

The new prayers, would they work like the current ones? Is it just an expanded list?

Yeah the prayers could definitely do something. I'd like to see a mirror of what stormcast got. Chapter traits, artefacts, prayers, adjustments to points.

Give us someway to get our damage up there with what the stormcast can do.

I would definitely be ok if the heroes were centric to the army... though there is the little issue that my opponents will simply try and fire every missile weapon they have at my hero models whereas the stormcast and beastclaw just have their abilities baked in to the unit... but I'm ok with an army being somewhat more difficult to use just so long as its not just outclassed out of the gate period.

A prayer to summon demons in addition to unit buffs would be OK by me. Just as long as the two current ones remain. I've found them very useful. Nothing like pulling judicators hiding out at the back to within charge range of your skull crushers, never mind mortal wounds!

I'm ok with the characters taking centre stage too.

 Bottle wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
A massive unit of Bloodletters pumps out an insane amount of Mortal Wounds if buffed and whipped. Some top tournament players have picked it up recently. The only problem is it requires Sayl to throw the unit around the board, so I would say the most crucial thing needed in the new book is movement shenanigans rather than more options for Mortal Wounds output.

Bloodletters are all well and good, but I'd like to be able to use Blood Warriors and Bloodreavers and not get laughed off the table.

Russ Veal, the UK master, cites Blood Warriors as his favourite unit in the game and rate Bloodreavers too. I've heard they are really good but haven't got my Bloodbound on the table just yet.

Blood Warriors are one of my favorite units, too. They are amazing sculpts, fun to paint, have really fun fluff, and their No Respite rule is a lot of fun, but as auticus pointed out, their damage output is absolutely abysmal. It may be a little unfair to criticize Bloodreavers. They serve their purpose as cheap cannon fodder well enough, but they're really only good for one round of combat. The fact that one of our only sources of rending attacks is completely lacking a save means that you damn well better kill something turn one or two (assuming you can get into charge range that quickly), or you better be ready to fight from your back foot for the rest of the game.

"I wish there was a way for this army to put out mortal wounds"

"Hey this unit puts out decent mortal wounds"

"I wish the units I liked did mortal wounds." and "Here's what they do vs a unit that completely outclasses them in point value."

I understand, it sucks having units that you like get stomped on from balancing issues, but... come on.

Bloodletters don't put out the volume of mortal wounds that the stormcast units do.

Now if Bloodletters put out the volume of mortal wounds that the stormcast units do, I would concede your point.

Bloodletters are 5.01 or 5.79 if near a hero in terms of avg damage output per turn (including their mortal wound propensity)

Retributors with starsoul maces 13.08 wounds

Significant difference. Being able to do a token mortal wound or two is not the same as reliably dumping shed loads of them out unless the argument was "but you said MORTAL WOUNDS you didn't mention how MANY" in which case I suppose I spoke too lazily then. Edited a previous post to reflect that.

My argument wasn't the Khorne had no source of mortal wounds, but that the Bloodbound don't have a way to deal them consistently the way competitive armies can, and I believe this is one of the reasons Bloodbound aren't competitive. I'm hoping either a prayer or allegiance ability will give us that reliable source of mortal wounds.

 Furious241 wrote:
"I wish there was a way for this army to put out mortal wounds"

"Hey this unit puts out decent mortal wounds"

"I wish the units I liked did mortal wounds." and "Here's what they do vs a unit that completely outclasses them in point value."

I understand, it sucks having units that you like get stomped on from balancing issues, but... come on.

You made up a response and applied it to him. Auticus noted that mortal wound output is effectively restricted to one unit as opposed to multiple options of other factions, and that Bloodletters require more work to put out less mortal wounds compared to other armies making them a poor analogy anyways.

 auticus wrote:
Yeah the prayers could definitely do something. I'd like to see a mirror of what stormcast got. Chapter traits, artefacts, prayers, adjustments to points.

Give us someway to get our damage up there with what the stormcast can do.

I would definitely be ok if the heroes were centric to the army... though there is the little issue that my opponents will simply try and fire every missile weapon they have at my hero models whereas the stormcast and beastclaw just have their abilities baked in to the unit... but I'm ok with an army being somewhat more difficult to use just so long as its not just outclassed out of the gate period.

Having your heroes shot at can be somewhat advantageous; Khorne units have poor saves overall (Blood Warriors and Juggernaught cav being notable exceptions), whereas the heroes have decent to good saves (3+ on the Bloodsecrator is a godsend) so if regular shooting gets pointed at the heroes it can save a comparatively high number of troops from death. Of course if its mortal wound shooting that doesn't apply, but it's something.

On the more optimistic side, at least Khorne has Wrathmongers. Stormcast can't do that

Khorne have been doing well on the UK tournament scene in recent months. A tournament I went to in Cardiff in December was won by pure Bloodbound (Matt Lyons from the Black Sun Podcast).

Partners in Chaos was won with Khorne by Russ and Terry from Facehammer. Terry then went on to place 4th at Sheffield Slaughter with them.

Yeah they haven't won a prestigious event just yet, but remember Russ was almost the winner at Warlords with Bloodbound.

Now, lots of times these armies aren't pure Khorne, but you need to look at what units they are taking to see the weaknesses the list has, and it's not access to Mortal Wounds because Bloodletters perform so well.

Mainly the non-Khorne units are:
- Sayl the Faithless
- Warp Lightening Cannons

That tells you that what Khorne is missing is reliable ranged threat and reliable mobility, and this is what the book needs to add otherwise players will stick with Mixed Chaos in the same way BCR players don't play pure BCR at high levels but favour the "MooClan" mixed destruction list (Grots + Cows).

Thanks for crunching the Maths, Auticus, but you need to consider the buff units in there - compare 30 Bloodletters + Bloodsecrator to 10 Retributors (420pts vs 440pts).

I'm gonna fudge the maths as I am on the train, but 1/3 of the Bloodletter attacks mortal wound, so that's 20 Mortal Wounds of the bat, the next 1/3 get a chance to wound and damage as normal too. On top of that the unit is battleline which means a.) counts towards the tax and b.) in the new escalation they start 9" away from enemy territory.

On top of that the Bloodsecrator makes them immune to battleshock, making them a 30 wound tarpit plus the Bloodsecrator is buffing everything else in a 30" AoE too.

And then we get into the realms of double bloodsecrators (although possibly getting a nerf in the GHBII if SCGT17 is to judge by) plus a bloodstoker and any other synergy you want to squeeze in there like your general or Damned terrain. If you have a 3 pieces of terrain in your deployment zone (tourney standard) you have a 50/50 chance of one being Damned,. Those are pretty reliable odds over the course of a 5 game event to add even more utility to them (at this point half their attacks would be doing a Mortal Wound).

At this point you are doing so many Mortal Wounds with a battleline unit you are basically going to delete whatever you fling them into with Sayl. The opponent then has to deal with them while the rest of your army sits back all buffed up still. If you had a second unit of them (only another 300pts), you could fling them in next turn too.

Well, those are my reasons for why Bloodletters are amazing and why it isn't access to Mortal Wounds that is holding Khorne back (if they even are being held back). The "Bloodletter Bomb" is a talked about thing on the UK meta, mentioned recently on both Heelanhammer and Facehammer. And you know my stance previously on holding the opinion of Russ Veal in high regard. He is the UK master after all, and so if he is singing the praises of Bloodletters and Bloodwarriors I am inclined to believe him.

Well hopefully he shares his wisdom in a blog or something then.

Having to rely on Sayl the Faithless being in my list ruins that theme. And for allegiance traits and artefacts, Sayl the Faithless makes my army not able to take any of the khorne themed items that we will now have access to since it would break allegiance.

Bloodletters in hordes Mortal Wounding on 5+ is not a bad thing. But its kind of like a really good athlete up against another really good athlete, except one of them is juicing (stormcast).

I've seen variations of that list though it usually doesn't do so well here simply because all of the mortal wounds and shooting first go to erase the heroes in a couple of turns and then the rest of the units fall apart without the buffs that they require, which opposed to things like Beastclaw and Stormcast those abilities are simply baked into them without needing buffs.

Thats really one of the main primary differences. (I run two bloodsecrators and I struggle to keep them alive past turn 3 because they take the entire enemy armies' shooting and mortal wounds right off the bat)

So I agree with you... bloodletters are a good unit. But having an entire army book with one good unit does not make a good army. It makes it more obvious to min/max. Stormcast as an example have a few different strong builds that they can run.

So from an internal balanced discussion - I'd still like to see one of the non-demon units be able to have a decent reliable damage output that is not dependent on character buffs so long as killing characters is not so much a difficult thing.

I suppose we will see what they did next month.

You should listen to Facehammer, it is the best podcast in my opinion, both very very funny and also very insightful.

I agree it's not great having to add in Sayl where theme is concerned, which is exactly why the most important thing the book adds in is new mobility options to encourage players to not break allegiance for mixed chaos. Some abilities to do splash mortal wounds at long range is also necessary to replace the Warp Lightening cannons players are using. Both of these are very doable with the new priest prayers and the battletrait.

I have high hopes for this new book because I think it could make both a very thematic and also competitive army with just a few tweaks.

Skullreapers can also be a good source Mortal Wounds, but yes perhaps a few more options. I don't think they need another Mortal Wound powerhouse though because in my opinion Bloodletters are more than good enough. They might rely on Bloodsecrators, but that's no different to Kunnin Ruk relying on the character too.

Coming from a theme standpoint again though bloodletters are demons. That is another niggle. If you want to run a mortal themed army (I am assuming they will do liek they did with tzeentch so you'll have the demons and mortals separate) you are kind of up that river without a paddle.

Ranged output definitely is something that needs added, and/or something that gets us into combat faster instead of having to walk across the table taking it on the chin for a couple of turns.

Fortunately for me I get to do chaos dwarves this year so when I go back to my khorne army next year this will have been vetted

Hopefully they will allow for mixed Khorne armies - I thought with Tzeentch it was the choice of general that decided your battletraits but you could still take anything in the book without breaking allegiance. Have I got it mistaken? (I haven't looked through the book myself).

It is but again if I want to run a mortal list and the only competitive choice are bloodletters then a couple mortal heroes backed by a horde of bloodletters is not really a mortal list to me. It is in essence a wide variety of flavors with only one flavor being used and the others discarded.

From a game sense it is a khorne army but from a thematic sense it is a mix of the most powerful items thrown together to give me a better advantage.

From a thematic standpoint from my perspective all types (demon, mortal, beast if they go that route) should have viable builds that can stand on their own.

The issue with Khorne isn't so much that they can't do well, it's that despite having a huge number of units to choose from there are only a few viable army builds that will do well. Perhaps more importantly in the casual, non-competitive scene the average Stormcast player has a notably easier time beating the average Khorne player. Were these two random armies it wouldn't be a huge issue, but since they are the poster boy foes and the starter set armies it's important that they balance against each other well. Also as Auticus noted, including even one non-Khorne unit breaks allegiance and means that isn't a Khorne army. It may be Khorne themed, but it's a Chaos army.

Warhammer has always have a bad problem of poor internal ballance in factions.

That the army of the God of War that despise magic and ranged combat its only viable with a specific Forgeworld Sorcerer and with Skaven Artillery its a big red flag that something is wrong.
I'm with Auticus in this. We need a good internal balance to make all units viable, not against the same foes and all the time, but don't make a One-Trick Faction like the Kunnin Ruk and the Beastclaw Raiders.

I want variety! I don't expect perfect balance, but even the posibility to run 3-4 diferent list will be a huge improvement.

And I think that GW should relax in the importance of Mortal Wounds. That today a army need to make a good amount of Mortal Wounds or its just bad means that something that was meant to be "special" and "deadly" has become a necesity.

Having mortal wounds should be a plus. Now, not having them its just very bad.

Khorne don't need ranged damage, he need more reliable sources to make his meele troops... reach meele. And protect them from ranged attacks.

They might update some of the warscrolls in the battletome and update the site later like they did with some of the Savage Orruks stuff.

Though I wonder if they might just lower costs.

The funny thing is that Bonesplittaz are actually among the most well-balanced armies if Kunnin' Rukk is taken out.

 Galas wrote:
Warhammer has always have a bad problem of poor internal ballance in factions.

That the army of the God of War that despise magic and ranged combat its only viable with a specific Forgeworld Sorcerer and with Skaven Artillery its a big red flag that something is wrong.
I'm with Auticus in this. We need a good internal balance to make all units viable, not against the same foes and all the time, but don't make a One-Trick Faction like the Kunnin Ruk and the Beastclaw Raiders.

I want variety! I don't expect perfect balance, but even the posibility to run 3-4 diferent list will be a huge improvement.

And I think that GW should relax in the importance of Mortal Wounds. That today a army need to make a good amount of Mortal Wounds or its just bad means that something that was meant to be "special" and "deadly" has become a necesity.

Having mortal wounds should be a plus. Now, not having them its just very bad.

Khorne don't need ranged damage, he need more reliable sources to make his meele troops... reach meele. And protect them from ranged attacks.

Yup, they need something on the vein of Ironjawz. Added mobility. Like, my army isn't top-dog or anything but point for point my ardboyz are far more efficient than the bloodwarriors, since they have a means to actually reach meelee with their usual 2d6+4'' movement, and have very easy access to rend.

They need to do a retool of all the army. Just minor rules tweaks will do to bring them in line. Not necessarily MW but better quality/quantity.

I never like the "just lower point costs" that way we end with the scale creep in the number of models in a game.

Sometimes a slight reduction of costs its apropiate, but I always prefer if things that are undercosted are nerfed in their rules, and not just become more expensive. The same in the inverse, don't lower costs, just make them better.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
The funny thing is that Bonesplittaz are actually among the most well-balanced armies if Kunnin' Rukk is taken out.

Not even then. The only time I find Kunnin' Rukk to be a problem is if you spam it entirely with Arrer boyz. They really shouldn't have been available as an option for it.

Khorne don't need any more help, at the local GW a guy run's Khorne and is nigh on unbeatable.

I'd be interested to hear a more detailed assessment on why you feel they don't need any more help and exactly how they are on par with the more modern books like stormcast, sylvaneth, and the orruks.

 Galas wrote:
I never like the "just lower point costs" that way we end with the scale creep in the number of models in a game.

Sometimes a slight reduction of costs its apropiate, but I always prefer if things that are undercosted are nerfed in their rules, and not just become more expensive. The same in the inverse, don't lower costs, just make them better.

The thing is, there's been months of people gaining experience with the current rules for a given warscroll, tons of data to figure out where the point cost should be. Change the rules and you make people have to learn the new ones and also throw the previous data away. It's much easier to adjust a.point cost to a scroll than adjust a scroll to a cost, and the latter will be wrong far more often.

 Rolsheen wrote:
Khorne don't need any more help, at the local GW a guy run's Khorne and is nigh on unbeatable.

Player, not the game?

I do have to say that AoS has proven to have a surprising degree of skill given the rules length. I was playing a few trial games of warmahordes mark 3 and it was jarring to go back to an 8th-ed WHFB level of complexity. If GW can nail the Stormcast-Khorne balance perfectly and have everything else along similar lines AoS could really be something.

I think the big problem with it is that GW isn't consistent. Stormcast and Khorne may get balanced well, but then something else will come along and not be balanced, and something else will come along and be underpowered. They are never consistent with it, so it ends up ruining the game because its a crap shoot if the faction you want will be cheesy or garbage.

Wayniac wrote:
I think the big problem with it is that GW isn't consistent. Stormcast and Khorne may get balanced well, but then something else will come along and not be balanced, and something else will come along and be underpowered. They are never consistent with it, so it ends up ruining the game because its a crap shoot if the faction you want will be cheesy or garbage.

As long as they attempt to balance this one things'll be better, the problem with 40k and WHFB is that.. well, there was never truly any sort of lookover after, you'll get some stuff that are really strong that end up breaking the balance until the next edition. If something is underpowered it's a lesser evil as that codex won't break barriers but it won't shatter the ceiling either.

The problem with 40k is that the balance has shattered the ceiling and the upper levels as well with specific codex.

The best thing about AoS is how much easier it is to maintain the balance with the living rules. Some factions are more powerful than others yes but not to a terrible degree. They could still take each other on. Only minor tweaks required rather than a complete overhaul like 40k would need.

Overall I agree however some of the builds are extreme and unless you are taking an extreme build you won't have much of a chance.

Blood Warriors and Bloodreavers can be very effective if used properly. Particularly with a Bloodsecrator or Bloodstoker nearby.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I never like the "just lower point costs" that way we end with the scale creep in the number of models in a game.

Sometimes a slight reduction of costs its apropiate, but I always prefer if things that are undercosted are nerfed in their rules, and not just become more expensive. The same in the inverse, don't lower costs, just make them better.

The thing is, there's been months of people gaining experience with the current rules for a given warscroll, tons of data to figure out where the point cost should be. Change the rules and you make people have to learn the new ones and also throw the previous data away. It's much easier to adjust a.point cost to a scroll than adjust a scroll to a cost, and the latter will be wrong far more often.

You are right, but in most cases the problem is with the rules, like BloodCrushers hiting like a wet sponge in the charge. When a Warscrol fails to represent the fantasy a unit should impersonate, just touching their point costs will not help them.

They might well upgrade some units in small ways as they did that with the tzeench book.

Ah yes, Blood and Skullcrushers. In my last game, my Skullcrushers failed their Murderous Charge roll and thus got bogged down fighting some Liberators and a Lord something or other instead of crashing through them. What I would hope for is that it's changed so that it's automatic, and the Brass Stampede just increases the amount of damage instead. The steam tank's Steel Behemoth rule is a much better way to do it.

Same for Gorefists for Blood Warriors. We have no shooting attacks except for a Korgorath's tentacles and the Slaughterpriests prayer, so we're already at a disadvantage. So when we get into combat, there's no time for messing around.

I think a lot of that is that different writers do different lists and because of that you're going to get some writers be more cautious and others more OP and the two don't mix very well.

Speaking of units in need of a upgrade, how the feth does Scyla only do 1 wound with his Brutal Fists? His fists are the size of Bloodreavers!

 EnTyme wrote:
Speaking of units in need of a upgrade, how the feth does Scyla only do 1 wound with his Brutal Fists? His fists are the size of Bloodreavers!

Yeah. Thit its the kind of problem that its not solved with just lowering points and making things cheaper (Or more expensive).

I don't want my Skullcrushers to be cheaper! I want them to be expensive and feell like abominations of flesh and metal stampeding trought enemy lines and munchin Skulls and Bones like Khorne-flakes!

Yeah, make things worth their price rather than keeping them mediocre with a points decrease!

Here's what I would like to see:

Skullcrushers automatically inflict D3 mortal wounds on 1 unit within 1" after a successful charge rather than what they currently have. The Brass Stampede is D6 mortal wounds instead...or something.

Bloodwarrior Gorefists automatically inflict a mortal wound if they make a save, rather than needing another roll afterwards.

Some sort of battletrait that rewards us for fighting in melee. Since we don't do shooting, our combat should be outstanding.

Compared to the mortal wound on charge abilities of other units like chariots or mournfangs juggernaut cavalry are pretty standard. Each model has 4-6 attacks apiece with good hit/wound values. They have 4/5 wounds each with a 4+ save. These guys ARE brutal melee combatants, if they are doing poorly it isn't a problem with the warscroll. A point cost change is entirely appropriate here rather than a minor change to the warscroll; that's exactly what I meant when I said that altering warscrolls as a baseline is a poor choice. If an ability is downright bad (Gorefists do come to mind here) or game breaking (Knight Azyros) a warscroll change can be appropriate but it should not be the go-to method. That doesn't even get into the trouble of the community being on different pages with updates, the hassle of re-learning rules instead of just writing a different number, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Some sort of battletrait that rewards us for fighting in melee. Since we don't do shooting, our combat should be outstanding.

Something like giving units free movement from taking casualties at range alongside a chance for bonuses to hit (or another benefit) for taking casualties in melee would be a very Khornate way to addressing the faction's issues.

Well, this is more a diferent point of view in the unit.

In the TGA forum, someone says that the problem with heavy cavalry in Age of Sigmar its that its more like a tank unit made to soap damage.
To me, thats its totally against the nature of what heavy cavalry should be. A less movile force that light cavalry made to hit like a truck with charges for the flanks (Ok, in AoS we don't have flanks, etc... but you understand me) but that can be grilled down in a long meele battle.

To me the damage output of Skullcrushers and Bloodcrushers its nowere near I imagine them. The same goes with the Demigryphs knights. I don't want them to be made cheaper, I want them to be beasts in combat and to punish the player that its outplayed by the Demigryph/Skullcrushers owner with a charge that creates total destruction.

But I agre with you, changin the point costs its the easy way to do this kind of things, and the most secure. Its just that I don't like how all the GW games end with things costing less and less points and the number of miniatures per battle just go up and up.

And you are correct that the Bloodcrushers rules with the charge are similar to other units, but in general I feel that the charges of chariots and heavy cavalry in Age of Sigmar are not strong enough.

Having played with/against both Juggernaut varients in 8th WHFB I would say that their performance was translated very well into AoS. They were good on the charge but the distinguishing feature was that they did much better in prolonged combat than conventional cavalry; they were often part of the main line both tanking and putting out solid amounts of damage. But more to the point they are beastly in combat; compare their stat lines to the infantry and cavalry of other factions. They may not seem too great when compared to Stormcast or other Khorne models, but these are both factions well away from the average when it comes to elite troops.

For those not following the New and Rumors thread, looks like preorders open next weekend!

The next two weeks are going to be hell.

Just the waiting...

 Future War Cultist wrote:
The next two weeks are going to be hell.

Just the waiting...

I'm considering pulling a Cartman and cryogenically freezing myself, but there aren't any mountains nearby.

 EnTyme wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
The next two weeks are going to be hell.

Just the waiting...

I'm considering pulling a Cartman and cryogenically freezing myself, but there aren't any mountains nearby.

You know what's better than a mountain? The ice cream freezer at your local store:



You'd have to pay for the ice cream though.

So now we know what the Allegiance Ability shall be.

Table of contents for Blades of Khorne, from the Age of Sigmar FB page:

Count the number of instances of 'blood'...

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Count the number of instances of 'blood'...

28!

i honestly expected more.

Edit: but only 13 mentions of skulls. poor skulls, so neglected...

Worthy of note that this is the first time the variants of the Slaughterpriest, Aspiring Deathbringer, and Exalted Deathbringer have had physical warscrolls.

 EnTyme wrote:
Worthy of note that this is the first time the variants of the Slaughterpriest, Aspiring Deathbringer, and Exalted Deathbringer have had physical warscrolls.

They were in the campaign books.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
Worthy of note that this is the first time the variants of the Slaughterpriest, Aspiring Deathbringer, and Exalted Deathbringer have had physical warscrolls.

They were in the campaign books.

Really? I never knew there were any warscrolls in the campaign books. I thought they just had scenarios and battalions. My mistake. Still nice to have the whole faction in one book now.

Blood Tithe will be interesting because if it works like how the Blood Tithe works for Khorne Daemonkin, half of them will be useless in Matched Play due to requiring reinforcement points (are you going to put aside points for a Bloodthirster on the off chance you can summon one?).

So either half of them will be useless and half (the ones that buff troops) will be great, or it will be a slightly different mechanic.

Wayniac wrote:
Blood Tithe will be interesting because if it works like how the Blood Tithe works for Khorne Daemonkin, half of them will be useless in Matched Play due to requiring reinforcement points (are you going to put aside points for a Bloodthirster on the off chance you can summon one?).

So either half of them will be useless and half (the ones that buff troops) will be great, or it will be a slightly different mechanic.

If it is a normal summon mechanic it would be a strong indicator for revised rules for that in GHB2.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
Blood Tithe will be interesting because if it works like how the Blood Tithe works for Khorne Daemonkin, half of them will be useless in Matched Play due to requiring reinforcement points (are you going to put aside points for a Bloodthirster on the off chance you can summon one?).

So either half of them will be useless and half (the ones that buff troops) will be great, or it will be a slightly different mechanic.

If it is a normal summon mechanic it would be a strong indicator for revised rules for that in GHB2.

I'm not so sure, but I certainly hope so! I fear just as equally it might be the old "Not everything is suited for Matched Play" excuse.

Wayniac wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
Blood Tithe will be interesting because if it works like how the Blood Tithe works for Khorne Daemonkin, half of them will be useless in Matched Play due to requiring reinforcement points (are you going to put aside points for a Bloodthirster on the off chance you can summon one?).

So either half of them will be useless and half (the ones that buff troops) will be great, or it will be a slightly different mechanic.

If it is a normal summon mechanic it would be a strong indicator for revised rules for that in GHB2.

I'm not so sure, but I certainly hope so! I fear just as equally it might be the old "Not everything is suited for Matched Play" excuse.

I would.expect the same, but allegiance abilities only exist in Matched Play. Players certainly can use them elsewhere but that's house rules.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I would.expect the same, but allegiance abilities only exist in Matched Play. Players certainly can use them elsewhere but that's house rules.

Actually, the General's Handbook says you can, and I quote, "use allegiance abilities whenever and wherever you play your games of Warhammer Age of Sigmar".

 tydrace wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I would.expect the same, but allegiance abilities only exist in Matched Play. Players certainly can use them elsewhere but that's house rules.

Actually, the General's Handbook says you can, and I quote, "use allegiance abilities whenever and wherever you play your games of Warhammer Age of Sigmar".

Well color me wrong. They are designed with matched play in mind, at least.

Wayniac wrote:
Blood Tithe will be interesting because if it works like how the Blood Tithe works for Khorne Daemonkin, half of them will be useless in Matched Play due to requiring reinforcement points (are you going to put aside points for a Bloodthirster on the off chance you can summon one?).

So either half of them will be useless and half (the ones that buff troops) will be great, or it will be a slightly different mechanic.

It will be a slightly different mechanic: https://war-of-sigmar.herokuapp.com/bloggings/1850 only one does summon and It's pretty clear it should be reserved for bloodthirsters.

Got my preorders up!

Well the blood tithe is interesting, much different from the 40k one but the options seem pretty good overall.

Not to mention it can be used in either hero phase makes it an interesting counter as you could easily wait for them to cast a mystic shield or badly needed attack spell and unbind it.

Anyone know what those Blood Tithe Cards are?

 EnsignTuna wrote:
Anyone know what those Blood Tithe Cards are?

I heard that some of the effects are:

- triggering multiple command abilities.
- automatically unbinding a single spell.
- healing all of your units ( )
- gain additional attacks or movement.

And you will get them, because it's all based on destroyed units (friend or foe). Because, say it with me now, Khorne cares not from where the blood flows, only that it flows!

According to War of Sigmar, Bloodreavers now cost +1 point, but have a 6+ save. Fair trade if you ask me.

 EnTyme wrote:
According to War of Sigmar, Bloodreavers now cost +1 point, but have a 6+ save. Fair trade if you ask me.

I'm ok with that. Initially I was hesitant, because I thought that a 6+ save is worthless and that they're only getting more expensive for no reason, but now I hear that it's possible to boost saves using prayers, this will work out great.

 Future War Cultist wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
According to War of Sigmar, Bloodreavers now cost +1 point, but have a 6+ save. Fair trade if you ask me.

I'm ok with that. Initially I was hesitant, because I thought that a 6+ save is worthless and that they're only getting more expensive for no reason, but now I hear that it's possible to boost saves using prayers, this will work out great.

Even without prayers. Put a unit on terrain and you've got a cheap objective holder with 5+ saves.

Lord Kragan wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:
According to War of Sigmar, Bloodreavers now cost +1 point, but have a 6+ save. Fair trade if you ask me.

I'm ok with that. Initially I was hesitant, because I thought that a 6+ save is worthless and that they're only getting more expensive for no reason, but now I hear that it's possible to boost saves using prayers, this will work out great.

Even without prayers. Put a unit on terrain and you've got a cheap objective holder with 5+ saves.

Oh yeah! And combine that with prayers...yeah, this works.

 Future War Cultist wrote:

 EnsignTuna wrote:
Anyone know what those Blood Tithe Cards are?

- healing all of your units ( ) What the...
Because, say it with me now, Khorne cares not from where the cheese flows, only that it flows!

A mass heal might be scarier if Khorne had more units with multiple wounds. A reason to run a bunch of Bloodcrushers or Skullcrushers, perhaps?

 RuneGrey wrote:
A mass heal might be scarier if Khorne had more units with multiple wounds. A reason to run a bunch of Bloodcrushers or Skullcrushers, perhaps?

This mass heal is restricted to Keyword: Khorne only right?

It's an allegiance ability so it can only be used period in an all Khorne army. So yeah, khorne only keyword.

The mass heal might not be great if you're mainly running bloodreavers, but I occasionally run a list with lots of heroes, Blood Warriors, Chaos Spawn, Khorgoraths, Skullcrushers and Chaos Knights. Then it'll be lovely.

For the thread

Blood Tithe:


Daemonic Weapons:



Prayers:

Killing Frenzy is the standout prayer. Will probably make Slaughterpriests a must have in a list and will make Bloodletter bombs even more deadly.

This selection of powers from the Blood Tithe and Prayers is exactly what Khorne needed. Khorne got solid replacements for spells here; movement from Murderlust, mortal wound nukes from Brass Skull, not-mystic shield from Bronzed Flesh, healing, and hit buffs from killing frenzy remove the reliance on Lord of War (which is good since they won't have it with Khorne allegiance!).

Yes! This is all music to my ears! Thanks for sharing ZebiolLizard2!

Just one question; if I'm reading that right, can Slaughterpriests attempt two prayers a turn? One of the two standard ones and one of the new ones?

Bottle wrote:Killing Frenzy is the standout prayer. Will probably make Slaughterpriests a must have in a list and will make Bloodletter bombs even more deadly.

Depending on your army composition, they all have some excellent utility. I'm looking at my Bloodreavers as cheap Blood Tithe batteries now.

Future War Cultist wrote:Yes! This is all music to my ears! Thanks for sharing ZebiolLizard2!

Just one question; if I'm reading that right, can Slaughterpriests attempt two prayers a turn? One of the two standard ones and one of the new ones?

That's how I read it as well. Hoping someone will post the rules for the new Bloodsecrater banners War of Sigmar mentioned.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another observation: The 8-point Blood Tithe ability doesn't mention that this has to be a daemon that can normally be summoned. Guess who just found a way to drop an Incandescent Skarbrand in the enemy's face? Oh, and he's next to a unit of Wrathmongers and in range of my Bloodsecrator? Enjoy those 3 attacks from Carnage and say "goodbye" to that Mournghoul.

Yeah its any thing really that can be summoned. The tourney crowd is already largely poo pooing this though from what I've read the past couple of days because no one wants to spend points for reserves.

Now if this were a free ability you didn't have to pay points for, you'd be seeing some sales of blood thirsters going up.

 auticus wrote:
Yeah its any thing really that can be summoned. The tourney crowd is already largely poo pooing this though from what I've read the past couple of days because no one wants to spend points for reserves.

Now if this were a free ability you didn't have to pay points for, you'd be seeing some sales of blood thirsters going up.

I strongly suspect this ability will be more useful come GHB2

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 auticus wrote:
Yeah its any thing really that can be summoned. The tourney crowd is already largely poo pooing this though from what I've read the past couple of days because no one wants to spend points for reserves.

Now if this were a free ability you didn't have to pay points for, you'd be seeing some sales of blood thirsters going up.

I strongly suspect this ability will be more useful come GHB2

Same here. I'm expecting summoning to get a buff of some sort. The pendulum swung too far the other way when they tried to balance the mechanic in GHB 1.

Hopefully it doesn't go too far back though, that'd be annoying.

I don't want summoning summoning to get to much of a boost (if any). However things like growing units beyond starting size/heavily invested in to get (i.e. Blood Points) should have more leeway if not complete allowance.

Reality is that at 8 Bloodpoints you're looking at an ability that goes off once per game. It might be twice once the battalions come out but currently it'd take some serious work and an obliging opponent to get it off twice.

 Hulksmash wrote:
I don't want summoning summoning to get to much of a boost (if any). However things like growing units beyond starting size/heavily invested in to get (i.e. Blood Points) should have more leeway if not complete allowance.

Reality is that at 8 Bloodpoints you're looking at an ability that goes off once per game. It might be twice once the battalions come out but currently it'd take some serious work and an obliging opponent to get it off twice.

16 min sized bloodreaver units would only take a mere 960 points...

The GHB2 could have changes yes, but we are still many months away from that for now.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
I don't want summoning summoning to get to much of a boost (if any). However things like growing units beyond starting size/heavily invested in to get (i.e. Blood Points) should have more leeway if not complete allowance.

Reality is that at 8 Bloodpoints you're looking at an ability that goes off once per game. It might be twice once the battalions come out but currently it'd take some serious work and an obliging opponent to get it off twice.

16 min sized bloodreaver units would only take a mere 960 points...

And in his own way that player paid his point by handicapping himself. Also 14 min sized unit is 980. 16 would be 1120

 auticus wrote:
The GHB2 could have changes yes, but we are still many months away from that for now.

Yeah but if a few tourney players want to whine about a detail they probably wouldn't use unless it was OP, who cares?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hulksmash wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
I don't want summoning summoning to get to much of a boost (if any). However things like growing units beyond starting size/heavily invested in to get (i.e. Blood Points) should have more leeway if not complete allowance.

Reality is that at 8 Bloodpoints you're looking at an ability that goes off once per game. It might be twice once the battalions come out but currently it'd take some serious work and an obliging opponent to get it off twice.

16 min sized bloodreaver units would only take a mere 960 points...

And in his own way that player paid his point by handicapping himself. Also 14 min sized unit is 980. 16 would be 1120

Oh did they go up to 70 points? Was unaware. At any rate, I'd expect to see armies running 16 min-bloodreavers sweeping the tourney scene soon enough!

*sarcasm*