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.

pm713 wrote:
Mannfred is not the only skilled necromancer I'm sure.

Top 4, the others being Neferata, Arkhan and that Nagash guy everyone keeps talking about.

pm713 wrote:
Mannfred is not the only skilled necromancer I'm sure.

Erm do remember vlad during the end times states that manny is the best von carstein. Along with Arkhan in that same conversation stating that manny is nagash's best servant after reflecting.

The problem is during that time nagash did not realise it neither did mannfred. hence vlad and arkhan agreed that nagash is going to make a big mistake handing him over.

Also mannfred is one of the best necromantic practioners. He even penned liber necris. Even Arkhan is impressed with his prowess and he has lived far longer than he has.

Okay so you can't make a better necromancer as Arkhan rival but why not someone more martial? If you're good at the actual fighting and commanding an army that would make you a good rival for Arkhan no?

I am seeing the value of Mannfred being around though.

pm713 wrote:

 shinros wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Mangod wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
It would be cool to see Nulahmian 2 wound soulblight infantry from Nulahmia, the freshly turned vampires of Nulahmia, basic infantry for the Nulahmian faction which hails from Nulahmia.

Nuuuuuuuuulahmia.

You really hate that name, don't you?

But some form of vampiric elite army is something I wouldn't mind, especially if they look Arkhan/Nagash/Neferata-y, rather than Mannfred-y.

I don't mind it, but I take perverse joy from pestering people who do. One of my guilty pleasures >.>

Well the name of Mannfred's new place is Carstinia, he is trying to make a new sylvania.

in a cage .

He was actually in a cage. See prisoner of the black sun.

I would but it's an audio book that GW haven't made into a book (as far as I know) so that and lots books is stuff I won't actually get.

pm713 wrote:
I would but it's an audio book that GW haven't made into a book (as far as I know) so that and lots books is stuff I won't actually get.

Mortarch of Night collects them in print form.

 Eldarain wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I would but it's an audio book that GW haven't made into a book (as far as I know) so that and lots books is stuff I won't actually get.

Mortarch of Night collects them in print form.

So it does. Thanks for pointing that out.

 shinros wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Mannfred is not the only skilled necromancer I'm sure.

Erm do remember vlad during the end times states that manny is the best von carstein. Along with Arkhan in that same conversation stating that manny is nagash's best servant after reflecting.

The problem is during that time nagash did not realise it neither did mannfred. hence vlad and arkhan agreed that nagash is going to make a big mistake handing him over.

That's not what I recall at all. Arkhan and Vlad were discussing the similarities between Nagash and Manny, talking about their towering egos and how neither could conceive of defeat, and that was why Vlad new Manfred would fall for Nagash's trap. Handing Manny over was the right decision and we'd still have the Old World if Be'Lakor didn't step in.

Similarly Manny was never the best Von Carstein. The moment Vlad was resurrected he slapped the snot out Manfred and only spared him due to Nagash's say so. Manfred was a better Necromancer than Vlad, but Vlad was a far better swordsman, statesmen and was more well-liked by Nagash than Manfred. Not sure how the AoS lore looks currently, but that's how things left off from the End Times Archaeon book.

Wasn't Be'Lakors activity stopped by Gotrek? Or am I mixing up my things again?

I'd like more Vlad he was always my favourite. I based my Vampire characters on him a little.

My local club want to wtart some AoS. So i found the only models I own and started painting. Tomb kings. I wish they had some news in this book.

The worwt part about tomb kings getting the scrapp is that so many of their models where so cool. The las kits where awsome.

Stalker, anake riders, war kitty and the necrosphinx. All of them deserves medal. The tomb guards, new priest and necrotect where all descent as well. But the TK where undead in style. Gold! Gold everywhere! Never mind that 5+ save, the gold is worth it. I mean the king model in the kitty is like a skinny Mr. T. i love them.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:

 shinros wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Mannfred is not the only skilled necromancer I'm sure.

Erm do remember vlad during the end times states that manny is the best von carstein. Along with Arkhan in that same conversation stating that manny is nagash's best servant after reflecting.

The problem is during that time nagash did not realise it neither did mannfred. hence vlad and arkhan agreed that nagash is going to make a big mistake handing him over.

That's not what I recall at all. Arkhan and Vlad were discussing the similarities between Nagash and Manny, talking about their towering egos and how neither could conceive of defeat, and that was why Vlad new Manfred would fall for Nagash's trap. Handing Manny over was the right decision and we'd still have the Old World if Be'Lakor didn't step in.

Similarly Manny was never the best Von Carstein. The moment Vlad was resurrected he slapped the snot out Manfred and only spared him due to Nagash's say so. Manfred was a better Necromancer than Vlad, but Vlad was a far better swordsman, statesmen and was more well-liked by Nagash than Manfred. Not sure how the AoS lore looks currently, but that's how things left off from the End Times Archaeon book.

Ah I misremembered looking up the quote again. But Vlad does state this at the end of the chapter.

And he is the author of too much of the tragedy, too much of the grief which afflicts them. Though I am loath to admit it, Mannfred shook the pillars of heaven and earth.

Hence he was the perfect scapegoat now in AOS if you were a god reshaping your servants again and you need a champion to bring fear, despair and agony when you send him out who do you pick? He underestimated the vampire before which caused the end of the old world. One thing I am interested in is that Josh Reynolds has said mannfred's trait in AOS he easily making bonds with people(so he can manipulate them later) which I kinda fun amusing to be honest.

Hopefully when Legion of Nagash comes out it might actually properly state why he did it. We know what Nagash uses Mannfred for in AOS but not why he chose him.

Anyone know if there’s any benefit at all (other than Allies) to getting the LoN book for Flesheaters?

Thanks.

Only the super friends inner circle has seen the book so most if not all of us cannot comment. I'd wait until this next weekend when the rest of us can look at it to ask that question.

From what I've gathered from the super friends review, FEC is not really a part of this at all.

Well that does make sense. The Flesh Eater Courts are their own independent groups whose 'true' leader Nagash wants captured alive (undead?).

Fleash eaters are not part of the new tome.

But there is one thing i wonder about for matched, if you choose to make an army that belongs to 1 of the new legions, what happends to the original subfactions and their battlelines?

aka if i want to field an army that belongs to legions of sacrament and brings nighthaunts, skellys and necros, can my spirits still be battle line?

No they cannot. They are still only batteline if you are using nighthaunt alligence.

ic.

so does any1 have any logical toughts to why the mortis still dont have the nighthaunt keyword?

cuz heres the thing:
mortis does not have NH keyword. all NH units plus the mortis have maligants keyword but that is not a subfaction...
so you still cant used the full content of the get started maligant box in match play.....
makes me wonder why they even bothered to make the box.

They hadn't come up with allegiances, battle traits, etc. when they released that box. It was before they'd decided how all the factions would work.

Deathmages should just be an ally for Nighthaunts, without that the allegiance is kinda left for dead.

Anyways, just finished going through the battletome. Overall I find it kind of... dry. There is a bunch of options there in the form of command traits and artifacts but many are just similar iterations of the same thing with minor changes while the new allegiances are the same thing. The Legion allegiance abilities are all just minor deviations from the Grand Host one, and really feel like they should have been meta-battalions rather than a faux-allegiance of their own. To me they seem an excuse to make a bunch of ultimately lackluster command trait & artifact options to make it look like Death has the same depth as other grand alliances. That said there are some cool picks in there and the spell lores look pretty cool. I just wish GW had gone for less content but made sure the content there was good.

A sidenote is that this battletome continues the low-battalion trend we've seen since Kharadron Overlords. Personally I liked things more back when there was a ton of different battalion options. I'm getting the sense that GW recognizes it doesn't know how to price battalions and it cutting back on them to compensate.

On the warscroll front the battletome does much better. Replacing summon spells with a keyword and deathly vigor is cleaner and more in line with how undead have traditionally played in Fantasy. The new special character option is solid, the new undead banners work give Death an easy way to reduce enemy bravery for screaming purposes, and Nighthaunts got a bit of a boost which more than compensates for the slight nerf to ethereal. The one change that has me scratching my head is the gaping maw on the terrorgheist, the way the new rule works is notably better but I feel the buff was uneeded and having it work in a weird alternate way rather than just mortal wounds comes across as different just to be different. I already anticipate having to explain that one a dozen times over. Also barring an FAQ FEC must now ally in unridden Terrorgheists (and Zombie Dragons), and have different rules for their ridden terrorgheist's maw and the new version of the unridden one.

Points wise I didn't notice any significant point changes but I didn't compare directly with the GHB. Balance suffers due to over-simplicity (Vampire on Zombie Dragon equipment 'options') and due to the massive unit discount, but neither of those are new.

It's a good addition and even though the content lacks depth/flavor it is still a major boost to what Death has to work with, and GW went out of their way to make sure that no part of the Alliance has been left out (since FEC already have their own battletome).

The TGs maw is written that way so that things that protect against MWs specifically (like Chaos Runeshields) don't work.

Not as good as Skarbrands Onslaught attack, but better than regular MWs.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Deathmages should just be an ally for Nighthaunts, without that the allegiance is kinda left for dead.

Anyways, just finished going through the battletome. Overall I find it kind of... dry. There is a bunch of options there in the form of command traits and artifacts but many are just similar iterations of the same thing with minor changes while the new allegiances are the same thing. The Legion allegiance abilities are all just minor deviations from the Grand Host one, and really feel like they should have been meta-battalions rather than a faux-allegiance of their own. To me they seem an excuse to make a bunch of ultimately lackluster command trait & artifact options to make it look like Death has the same depth as other grand alliances. That said there are some cool picks in there and the spell lores look pretty cool. I just wish GW had gone for less content but made sure the content there was good.

A sidenote is that this battletome continues the low-battalion trend we've seen since Kharadron Overlords. Personally I liked things more back when there was a ton of different battalion options. I'm getting the sense that GW recognizes it doesn't know how to price battalions and it cutting back on them to compensate.

On the warscroll front the battletome does much better. Replacing summon spells with a keyword and deathly vigor is cleaner and more in line with how undead have traditionally played in Fantasy. The new special character option is solid, the new undead banners work give Death an easy way to reduce enemy bravery for screaming purposes, and Nighthaunts got a bit of a boost which more than compensates for the slight nerf to ethereal. The one change that has me scratching my head is the gaping maw on the terrorgheist, the way the new rule works is notably better but I feel the buff was uneeded and having it work in a weird alternate way rather than just mortal wounds comes across as different just to be different. I already anticipate having to explain that one a dozen times over. Also barring an FAQ FEC must now ally in unridden Terrorgheists (and Zombie Dragons), and have different rules for their ridden terrorgheist's maw and the new version of the unridden one.

Points wise I didn't notice any significant point changes but I didn't compare directly with the GHB. Balance suffers due to over-simplicity (Vampire on Zombie Dragon equipment 'options') and due to the massive unit discount, but neither of those are new.

It's a good addition and even though the content lacks depth/flavor it is still a major boost to what Death has to work with, and GW went out of their way to make sure that no part of the Alliance has been left out (since FEC already have their own battletome).

What did you think of the lore?

I liked it. Wasn't anything shocking or amazing but it added more depth to what we already had, which is really really important in the long run and I'm glad to see GW do that. There's one tidbit in there that has no explanation, something that's unresolved and presumably is a hint of events/armies to come. This I also liked for the same reason. I dislike when new armies pop up with no previous hints that they existed, it's OK once in a while if things are explained well (Kharadron Overlords) but I feel it's much better execution to ad hints & snippets leading up to it. Like the Daughters of Khaine revamp, or the past Sylvaneth revamp.

I loved the art.

The two page spread that details the beef between Sigmar and Nagash is probably my favorite. It may well be reused art, as it looks familiar, but it fits so well in the context of the story. Its got Simar on one end, standing at ease and staring stoicly at his foe, hands on his hammer, painted in golden hues. On the other side is Nagash, returning a stare at Sigmar with his hand resting on the pommel of his sword, painted in dark tones.

Got the tome and its pretty good.

Some interesting fluff - especially about Shyish - although I wish they had made it a bit more nuanced like their own novels - ie there are different aspects to Nagash that are worshipped, more on how the living interact with the dead. Its a shame they are so paranoid about not referencing the novels which make the various races much more three dimensional

Sad there are very few new units: The Bloodseeker Palanquin and a Blood Knight Lord

We have Vampire Lords but no generic vampires apart from Blood Knights and Handmaidens stuck on a throne - but the fluff including in LON is full of the lesser vampires be nice to be able to have them in the game as NinthMusketeer suggested. Same with mortal followers,

The art is good but lots re-used.

Mannfred grew less and less interesting as the End Times progressed so I was disappointed he is back and still a dick, lots of more interesting vampires to bring back in my view.

I am hoping Mortarch of Blood is good and Neferata is not short changed again, as the last major novel I read had the author Werner thinking female vampires (maybe women in general) were all soft and weak which is sooooo not true

Dance of the Skulls gave me some hope, .

What's the go with the three mortach's? Do they have separate battalion abilities or anything like that? what exactly makes them different, the units they can take?

Quick question! to get the updated warscrolls on the app do i have to redownload just them, or the entire app?

 Madmatt wrote:
What's the go with the three mortach's? Do they have separate battalion abilities or anything like that? what exactly makes them different, the units they can take?

Yeah, they each have their own unique battalion, and their allegiance abilities, relics, command traits, etc. are different if you take the Legion of Sacrament, Blood or Night. All of them can take any unit in the book in their armies, though if you have a Mortarch, you have to include the appropriate one as the general (so you couldn't have Arkhan leading a Legion of Blood army, for example).

Quick question! to get the updated warscrolls on the app do i have to redownload just them, or the entire app?

Delete and re-download them individually.

Any chance someone could share the allegiance abilities?
Who's the best do you reckon? I've always been a von carstein fan but the more i look the more i'm starting to like Neferata and her game style.

Wait, so is summoning gone now? Like you can't save reinforcement points to summon a new unit (like a banshee) during the game?

The Ethereal nerf is odd to me. I don't know that the old method was really all that powerful. The only model that it was really broken on is the Mourngul, and it actually has a different rule that did effectively the same thing, so this change won't affect it. Seriously, a 2+ Mourngul is just annoying to deal with.