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.

So I asked this question of josh this is the one thing that has been bothering me since AOS also he is answering lore questions on twitter through askfm

I have a question what does nagash see in mannfred? Lore wise? He must have a trait or factor that nagash see's value in. Compared to the other Mortarch's.

In my opinion, Mannfred is a scrambler. Always seeking his own advantage in any situation, and quick to seize on any opportunity that comes his way. A tactical schemer. He acts as a counterbalance to the qualities embodied in Neferata - patience and strategy - and Arkhan - loyal and unambitious.

Nagash is paranoid. He sees traitors in every shadow and cannot conceive of someone not wanting what he has (in fact, he and Mannfred are a LOT alike). The Mortarchs are simultaneously his most powerful followers and the greatest potential dangers to his reign. So, Mannfred exists because he acts as a foil to Neferata, upsetting her schemes and distracting her from any attempts at usurpation, and as a rival to Arkhan, prodding him into action and keeping him alert for treachery.

Too, Mannfred is the most aggressive of the Mortarchs - Neferata, by nature, would rather out think the enemy than face them in the field, while Arkhan's loyalty prevents him from striking out on his own initiative much. Mannfred will happily take the war to the enemy, and have no difficulty adapting to an ever-changing situation. Neferata would rather die than abandon what's hers, and Arkhan's major overriding concern is defending Nagash. Mannfred, on the other hand, will happily abandon his army if it looks like he's going to lose, escape, rebuild and try again at a later date. Smash him down, he just pops up elsewhere, with another army and an even more infuriating scheme. He serves Nagash by serving his own ambitions - like Nagash, he cannot conceive of defeat, or failure. So whatever happens, he'll just keep trying.

More simply, Neferata is Nagash's castellan, defending his holdings. Arkhan is his grand vizier, overseeing the running of the realm and handing down orders. And Mannfred is his champion, casting down his foes (whoever they might be) and making them curse the name of Nagash.


This seems to match up with the audio drama's and what we have seen of him in lord of undeath. I am quite happy with this answer also they made the point that him and nagash are alike in end times even vlad and arkhan admiited this so it's not surprising seeing nagash call mannfred his"child" in the audio drama and lord of undeath.

Nagash is confident that he's better than Mannfred. And it isn't just arrogance; Nagash is a better necromancer, a better fighter, and most importantly a better schemer. No matter what Mannfred does, Nagash knows that he can ultimately bend those actions and events to suit his purposes. Personally I don't see why Nagahsh wouldn't keep Mannfred around. Sure he's always plotting to seize power but its never going to work, and in the meantime Mannfred gets stuff done more so than either of the other two.

It's cool getting a response from the author though and I enjoyed reading it. Thanks for putting this here!

I'm hoping to see a lot more fleshing out of the Death faction. In fact I wouldn't mind there being a Mortach for each Death faction. Something like;

1. Soul Blight: Neferata
2. Death mage: Arkhan
3. Deathrattle: Krell
4. Death walker: (I could picture a rotting Vlad)
5. Mordant: Ushoran
6. Nighthaunt: (I can picture a ghostly Isabel)
7. Mummy: Setra
8. ?: Manfred
9. Something new.

Just something I had been thinking about.

Actually considering that FEC are the sub-faction with the most depth I think Death needs expanded options rather than fleshing out

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Nagash is confident that he's better than Mannfred. And it isn't just arrogance; Nagash is a better necromancer, a better fighter, and most importantly a better schemer. No matter what Mannfred does, Nagash knows that he can ultimately bend those actions and events to suit his purposes. Personally I don't see why Nagahsh wouldn't keep Mannfred around. Sure he's always plotting to seize power but its never going to work, and in the meantime Mannfred gets stuff done more so than either of the other two.

It's cool getting a response from the author though and I enjoyed reading it. Thanks for putting this here!

No problem! Josh has been answering a lot of AOS questions it's pretty neat I recommend you give it a read on his twitter.

Yup gathered the same outlook when reading lord of undeath I wanted to get Josh's insight because they never really "outright" say why nagash bought mannfred back considering events from end times in lord of undeath nagash just says he values his twisted mind and his scheming puts neferata's to shame. With this insight from josh and lord of undeath/audio drama I have a better understanding of the value nagash's see's in mannfred.

It's quite interesting in lord of undeath nagash notes that mannfred resisted chaos the best out of the mortarch's so I assume it was his shannigans that kept the realm of death from falling completely? Until he got captured by blood bound. What's funny is that mannfred seems aware when nagash is manipulating him but never knows to what ends he figures it out after awhile.

Do we know to what extent the incarnates remember the old world? Allariel remembers Athel Loren and Tyrion and Melakith remembered to squeeze the elven souls outta Slaanesh but my question is does Nagash remember how Manfred destroyed the World that Was? An action that resulted in Nagash dying, which he doesn't do too often and he tends to hold grudges against those who do it.

Is that addressed in any way or are we to just ignore everything in the World that Was ever happened?

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:
Do we know to what extent the incarnates remember the old world? Allariel remembers Athel Loren and Tyrion and Melakith remembered to squeeze the elven souls outta Slaanesh but my question is does Nagash remember how Manfred destroyed the World that Was? An action that resulted in Nagash dying, which he doesn't do too often and he tends to hold grudges against those who do it.

Is that addressed in any way or are we to just ignore everything in the World that Was ever happened?

The events of the world that was is still canon it's referenced several times in books, battletomes and campaign books.

Well they do indeed remember they make several references to the world that was(Hell sigmar has the core of the world hanging above his palace) they even make the point that mannfred and neferata tales surround them that they were around during the events of the world that was and their bloodline lines stretch back to even before the age of myth. Even krell is mentioned in the death grand alliance book that a "lord of despair" is said to have been around in the age of myth but there are "whispers that he is older than that"(incoming new krell model!)

They make the point that nagash has an eternal grudge against skaven due to past events.

Nagash has obelisks filled with spirits from the world that was(their malice is crazy considering how they died when the world was consumed). Also do remember during end times Arkhan and vlad make the exact point that mannfred is perhaps nagash's greatest servant and vlad himself admits mannfred has done and achieved far more than he has. Of course Arkhan and vlad do also state due to nagash's arrogance during the end times he does not realize this. (In my opinion they were still thinking like mortals instead of gods, since they were in the process of becoming ones, the mistake they did instead of working together at once they were pointing fingers over who did what and who killed who.)

Sigmar even has a library of the events of the world that was for his general's to study so they can learn from his mistakes of the past to well not allow chaos to devour everything again, the way it's written is that those events don't really "matter" to them too much in the grand scheme of things well to normal folks. It's more legend and history now.

So in context Arkhan and vlad in end times pretty much state in athel loren that nagash is pretty much giving up his most prized servant without realizing it and making a mistake. Hell mannfred was pissed off with the tomb kings and neferata controlling sylvania and not the von carsteins but was "dealing" with it and suddenly nagash throws him to the wolves after resurrecting him, honestly in the end you should fear the person with nothing left to lose. Mannfred had nothing left to lose at that point nagash did the same thing when he had nothing left to lose either.

Hell you can even say that nagash might of been impressed? More than anything? They make the exact point in lord of undeath that nagash loves and values mannfred's twisted mind and how it operates and how it puts neferata's schemes to shame, I mean who else saw that mannfred would enable the destruction of the world for his revenge? Who would go that far?

Neferata makes the point in lord of undeath when her knight calls mannfred a coward(for recovering after a battle with the stormcast) for him to retract his remark and not to underestimate him because he is the type of person to chase someone to the end of their days if they truly wrong him. What do you think this was a nod to?

The point is hammered home again and again nagash and mannfred are extremely alike of each other even vlad states this in end times. Perhaps nagash realized his mistake? Plus learned how to proper handle someone like mannfred as a vassal going by josh's description and considering in the audio drama and lord of undeath(last realm gate book). He calls mannfred "his child" or prodigal son he never refers to the other mortarch's in such a fashion not even Arkhan. That suggest's to me nagash did some thinking at some point in his godhood.

Like sigmar deciding to finally make the stormcast because again and again normal humans kept being punched in the face by empowered daemon soldiers(This is the lore reason) and perhaps something similar happened with nagash? He looked back at what he did in athel loren and corrected it's clear nagash has his own "vision" on preserving and saving the realms I mean he is building another black pyramid.

Plus as josh said mannfred is the only vampire that would happily war with someone until they are utterly defeated and would adapt to situations on hand. Plus josh says that mannfred and how he acts serves as a counterbalance to neferata and Arkhan so they don't fall back into their "bad" habits.

It has been several thousand years the gods have changed(from what I have read) and many of them have re thought a few things over the years the incarnates have changed in terms of outlook(due to godhood plus 1000+ years of time) but retain some of what made them well them. Josh also says perhaps they are now simply the reflection/shade of the people's beliefs? Even mannfred believes that nagash is a god(he even chides stormcast over saying he was not one) and he is his master now so even mannfred has grown and changed slightly.

In context think about it nagash is the god of death he has extreme control over the undead even vampires he can influence what worse punishment or reward for mannfred than eternal servitude? Also mannfred himself had to admit in the lord of undeath novel that nagash IS his master. Honestly in mannfred's mind I personally think he is happy just being well "alive".

Well, Nagash went from the Old World that he did not rule and was even losing what grip he did have, to the Realm of Death where he ruled everything and was widely worshiped as a god by both the living and dead. I think he could manage to forgive Mannfred in that context.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Well, Nagash went from the Old World that he did not rule and was even losing what grip he did have, to the Realm of Death where he ruled everything and was widely worshiped as a god by both the living and dead. I think he could manage to forgive Mannfred in that context.

Indeed, this is a much more simple response I tend to dragon on with explaining things.

In the AoS novel Lord of Undeath, they make it pretty clear what Nagash thinks of his Mortarchs and what they think of him.

He keeps Mannfred around because he's easy to control. Mannfred wants power, and Nagash keeps dangling it in front of him, giving him opportunities to prove himself and make him feel powerful. In the novel, he forced the Stormcast to wake up Mannfred, who attacked them. It gave him knowledge of the SE's abilities and gave Mannfred something new to strive for (wiping out the Stormcast interlopers to gain/prove his power). It was pretty clear that Nagash knows he can't "control" Mannfred the way he can Arkhan (who licks his boots basically the whole time), but he can point him the right way to gain an advantage in either intel or just by slaughtering the opposition.

Right asked another question I feel this would help people deciding on a background for their army or heck in army building considering death is lacking in fluff. Remember this is also josh's opinion. 

How do the mortal's of shyish worship nagash? Would they be more than happy to become undead? Viewing it as something greater than their mortal coils?

In different ways, in different places, I imagine. Some might yearn to be undead, others don't. Some might co-exist with the dead, in a form of ancestor worship, while others might seal their dead away, to be forever undisturbed ('render unto Nagash').

Think of it this way - even monotheistic religions tend to have a lot of variability in ritual, if not dogma. And Nagash probably doesn't care about *how* he's worshipped, so long as he's worshipped.

Another one.

In the world that was vampires were considered the "blood of nagash". Considering Nagash is now a god are vampires viewed differently to the mortals of shyish compared to the other realms? In this case would Neferata and Mannfred appearing in a town they would be viewed as some form of holy figure?

Pretty much, yes, depending on the place and context. In some places, vampires are possibly seen as the equivalent to messengers from god - prophets and holy men. In others, as those who have been blessed - or cursed - by a god. Immortality might not be seen as a good thing by those who worship death

Interesting tidbits, thanks for posting them here.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Interesting tidbits, thanks for posting them here.

No problem I think having such information helps in background building for your army plus it's nice to know the general religion of the people of shyish.