Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

yeah, Nurgle is overpriced. probably because penalities to hit in CC weren't common at the time of release.

MoN would probably be better if it was +1 T.

Oh hell yea. 5T warriors please!

actually MoN + lore of shadows signature spell is the ultimate combo. and or fear/terror works too.

reduce your opponents WS to 1 with the debuff, then -1 ws for nurgle = ws0. opponent cant swing. so your uber unit of doom cant swing and just take hits.

One other strike against MoN (aside from only mattering for very specific weapon skills) is that most of the BS based shooting in the game is pretty irrelevant to Chosen. Their armor and toughness stops most bows/darts and the like, so really you are only worried about bolt throwers and some of the skaven shooting. Ward save bonuses are good against cannons and other artillery that use templates, as well as magic missiles and the like.

Honestly, they could probably switch the prices for MoN and MoT and do pretty well.

lixulana - I thought that MoN was errata'd "to a minimum of 1"

The opposite.

they removed the "To a minimum of 1" with the Errata.

However you can still attack - hitting on 6s, just hit automaticaly

True dat. Honestly, I forgot the Nurgle Mark cost more. That obviously makes it worse, then.

The missiles vs. artillery thing, as I mentioned, tips the favor slightly towards Tzeentch. Honestly, though, a 6+ Ward won't do much against a cannon or whatever. Especially when you're only tossing a handful of dice. The Chosen with the big Ward will do well, of course.

@Infreak: as I said, I did the Mathhammer, and a -1 to hit is the same as a +1 to your Ward in CC. Any increase in what you need to hit means you take ~17% less hits. An increase on your Ward to save means you take ~17% less wounds.
So the only difference between Nurgle and Tzeentch Chosen is that Tzeentch are better against artillery (their Ward improvement protects them from BS and non-BS shooting). So they're slightly better.
That, and Nurgle is more expensive. Grumble. So Tzeentch is, because of this, a good deal better.
Unless, for some strange reason, decreasing the number of Wounds is better than decreasing the number of Hits. But that would be some straight-up math voodoo that I don't want to think about.

nosferatu1001 wrote:However you can still attack - hitting on 6s, just hit automaticaly

however, units with WS0 may not attack and are hit automatically themselves.

Warpsolution wrote:True dat. Honestly, I forgot the Nurgle Mark cost more. That obviously makes it worse, then.

The missiles vs. artillery thing, as I mentioned, tips the favor slightly towards Tzeentch. Honestly, though, a 6+ Ward won't do much against a cannon or whatever. Especially when you're only tossing a handful of dice. The Chosen with the big Ward will do well, of course.

@Infreak: as I said, I did the Mathhammer, and a -1 to hit is the same as a +1 to your Ward in CC. Any increase in what you need to hit means you take ~17% less hits. An increase on your Ward to save means you take ~17% less wounds.
So the only difference between Nurgle and Tzeentch Chosen is that Tzeentch are better against artillery (their Ward improvement protects them from BS and non-BS shooting). So they're slightly better.
That, and Nurgle is more expensive. Grumble. So Tzeentch is, because of this, a good deal better.
Unless, for some strange reason, decreasing the number of Wounds is better than decreasing the number of Hits. But that would be some straight-up math voodoo that I don't want to think about.

Also remember that Nurgle isn't -1 to hit in melee anymore, but rather -1 WS when attacking (but not BEING attacked), so it only matters in melee when your WS is one higher than the opponent's, or low enough that -1 makes your opponent's double plus 1 for the 5+ to hit. So for instance, if you are WS5 attacking Marauders (WS4) with Mark of Nurgle you go from needing 3's to hit to 4's. If you are WS 4 or 3, doesn't change. If you are WS 2 then you hit on 5's. Whoo hoo? Though on warriors/chosen it is a little better since it takes WS 3 downe to 2, so they need 5's to hit, and WS is a bit more common. Still, MoT is still cheaper and makes ALL attacks 17% less likely to wound, instead of just a small subset like Nurgle.

@ Warpsolution, I think your doing it wrong.

As far as CC is concerned, MoN reduces WS by 1. It doesnt give -1 to hit. And the reduced WS only helps warriors when they are fighting WS 3, reducing it to 2, or fighting WS 11, which doesnt exist. Tzeentch is undoubtedly better in CC.

Another note for Tzeentch, is many players stack an ironcurse icon into a Tzeentch block, giving you a 5+ ward vs warmachines instead of a 6.


@ Grey Templar

Holy hell. I never knew a unit could hit WS 0. Those penalties are pretty powerful. I'll have to look into that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Darn you Wehrkind! Response ninja'd.

yes, the Errata changed the MoN penalty slightly.

previously it was "To a minimum of 1"

now that limitation is gone so you can theoretically reduce opponents down to 0.

the rules at the beginning are very clear that all Stats range from 0 to 10.

on page 4, it says that WS0 means they can't defend themselves and are hit automatically.


note that affected models can still attack, they just have WS0 and will never get better then a 5+ and usually will need 6s.

the -1 penalty also doesn't effect the MoN models when attacking the enemy.

Grey Templar wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:However you can still attack - hitting on 6s, just hit automaticaly

however, units with WS0 may not attack and are hit automatically themselves.

Yes but they only count as -1 WS when attacking you, so when you attack them they're WS1.

GT - I was about to contrdaict your earlier post (that WS0 means you cant attack at all) to point out that was incorrect, then noticed your later one

They also cannot hit on a 5+, as you MUST use the table which does not have an entry for WS0 (and note the "formula" is only a reminder) so you fall bck on "roll of a 6 to hit is always a success"

The only rule I found was "A natural roll of a 6 always hits".

Nothing about WS0 meaning you can't attack.

i was slightly incorrect.


WS0 can still attack, but attacks made against WS0 auto hit.

Huh. I always and forever thought that the Mark of Nurgle was a -1 to hit. Was it ever? Could of Flies?

...why is this bonus even considered remotely good, then? Sheesh.

Nevermind. I was holding on to some hope that Tzeentch wasn't the one-absolute-best choice, or at least that it wasn't wheels and miles ahead of all the others. But never mind, then.

Really, though, was it -1 to hit in 7th? If not, I've been cheated. I've read through every codex when I was at work, but WoC never interested me, since so many people play it. And here it seems I may have wanted to read closer...

It is -1 to hit in the book, but in the FAQ they inexplicably changed it to -1 WS for models attacking models with MoN. It really makes zero sense, as WS is sort of a throw away stat once you get 1 point higher than your target. I just don't get it :(

So yea, you NEED the FAQ to play WoC correctly there, as it drastically changes MoN. Though really, if someone really wanted to play it as -1 to hit like it is in the book, I wouldn't care. It is still over priced at that point, unless you are going really heavy into Lore of Nurgle where you get spells that affect everyone around except those with MoN.

it's -1 WS in my book.

It was an errata, therefore any later printings will have the correct stat