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.

I'd like to know what everyones' thoughts are on the two different versions of the Slaughterpriest. What type of Khorne Bloodbound armies are each good in, what makes each weapon good, etc? I think, just by looking at them, that the axe version is just straight up better. Especially with increased attacks from Bloodsecrators and Wrathmongers, but I haven't tested it extensively yet.

I just got the wrong order from an Amazon vendor (two wrong orders from GameNerdz, but that's another story) and instead of having one of each, I have two versions of the Slaughterpriest - Hackblade & Wrathhammer variant. While I THINK the axe version is better, I'd like for some of you to assure me that the H&W version has its own merits so I don't feel like I lost out on too much.

Thanks in advance guys.

I think it evens out with both versions, as with the Hackblade version you do get to use two weapons to attack with. The Axeblade is a little bit more reliable due to the always 2" range (you'll know where he has to stand) and the 2 damage, but the Hackblade version could possible get a bonus attack on each weapon.

Both choices are equal.

The axe one does more damage though. If you play with a points comp the merit of the Hackblade is that you get the effects of the priest's abilities on the board cheaper. If you don't play with points, well then imo the Hackblade is an inferior choice.

Attilla wrote:
The axe one does more damage though. If you play with a points comp the merit of the Hackblade is that you get the effects of the priest's abilities on the board cheaper. If you don't play with points, well then imo the Hackblade is an inferior choice.

Agreed; while considering the Slaughterpriest's role I don't think its a huge difference, the hackblade isn't as good in an objective sense.

The Wrath Hammer has a range of 3", which allows the Wrath Hammer Slaughter Priest to sometime do damage when the Ruinous Axe Slaughter Priest can't even attack.

I consider the weapons even.

I agree that once you get within 1", the Ruinous Axe version will do slightly more damage. From 2" to just outside of 1", the Ruinous axe is clearly better than the Wrath Hammer.

i.e. at 3", Wrath Hammer is clearly better.
at 2", Ruinous axe is clearly better.
at 1", Ruinous axe is slightly better.

One thing i would think about is armor rolls, will the target make 3 armor rolls vs 6? More dice hurts armor saves and the axe may do 2 damage per attack but every save drops that fast. The biggest thing I would weigh my choice on is what kind of army I am up against, 5+/6+ saves then the axe but against 4+ saves and better I would easily go for hack blade as it is more reliable to actually do damage (probably not as much but better than no damage). You can easily roll 3 4+ saves but 6 4+ saves and you are bound to fail more.

As for adding attacks to the model its not much of a difference, the axe edges out due to being less random but if the hack rolled 3 for its d3 they still do the same amount of damage. Your army of bloodbound also doesnt really affect them due to this point, more of just what army you are facing.

But turning that save logic around, each failed save means more damage gets through, or having more saves to roll means you pass more. 3 saves with 2 dmg each vs 6 saves with 1 dmg each is identical in all terms except consistency; the latter is less likely to do really good or really bad in a given round.

Great points, guys. Thank you.

@Solosam47
While they do hurt saves, there's also the situation where you're attacking Blood Warriors and you don't want them making extra saves. But like you said, it really depends on what you're fighting. I was also thinking that using the Wrathhammer at max range, while being behind a line of your guys would be a great use of that extra range, even if you're making less attacks (which is alright considering his abilities are great without even including his melee potential).

 mrstimpson wrote:
Great points, guys. Thank you.

@Solosam47
While they do hurt saves, there's also the situation where you're attacking Blood Warriors and you don't want them making extra saves. But like you said, it really depends on what you're fighting. I was also thinking that using the Wrathhammer at max range, while being behind a line of your guys would be a great use of that extra range, even if you're making less attacks (which is alright considering his abilities are great without even including his melee potential).

Glad my advice could help ya

Honestly the 3' range isnt something I would even consider, sure he is behind your line getting a few attacks in (dont get me wrong thats all gravy) but its only a matter of time before he is up front on the line. In a BB army he is either in the back enough to where he doesnt fight or he is on that front line. Its nice to have and when you can for sure get the value of it but I dont see it coming up too often.

As for the blood warriors, sure you dont want them making extra saves but there are only a handful of special cases like that so in the overall picture I wouldnt worry about it too much. Plus if you are fighting blood warriors and you brought the hackpriest, why is he fighting them in the first place? just have him elsewhere. A big thing to remember is there are always those special cases, but just cause they exist doesnt mean it nullifies the value of the unit. I guess my tip is you can never get rid of all the "what ifs" but rather look at the big picture and see if it works in most cases or not.

If you had to pick one and just one, then look at your meta and see what kind of armies you play, are there more 4+ saves or 5+ saves? Then just chose the one that will be effective most of the time.

 Solosam47 wrote:
just chose the one that will be effective most of the time.

That would be the Axe, then. At 2 average wounds per round vs 1.5 it's output is 33% better. Number of saves rolled by the opponent is largely irrelevant short of them having 'save on 6' abilities.

endur wrote:
The Wrath Hammer has a range of 3", which allows the Wrath Hammer Slaughter Priest to sometime do damage when the Ruinous Axe Slaughter Priest can't even attack.

Given the mismatched range of the weapons, I somehow expected the Hammer would have a drag function, to pull hit / wounded models into range of the Hackblade. But instead it's just a fairly lackluster weapon with max CC range.

Axe seems entirely better to me, but since both models are so nice I'd happily run one of both just to use the different sculpts

- Salvage

 Boss Salvage wrote:

endur wrote:
The Wrath Hammer has a range of 3", which allows the Wrath Hammer Slaughter Priest to sometime do damage when the Ruinous Axe Slaughter Priest can't even attack.

Axe seems entirely better to me, but since both models are so nice I'd happily run one of both just to use the different sculpts

And that's basically the answer to the thread in a sentence