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.

Ah the Keeper is £85. I thought it might be the size of the 40K Gullierman from previous pics but its actually about the size of a Knight.

Thats fine though. Its a incredible model and looking forward to seeing how others paint it.

SamusDrake wrote:
Ah the Keeper is £85. I thought it might be the size of the 40K Gullierman from previous pics but its actually about the size of a Knight.

Thats fine though. Its a incredible model and looking forward to seeing how others paint it.

Neat thing is that basically the only option to change on it for weapons is one arm (between knife, claw and whip) so I can see it being potentially easy to magnetize for all the options!
I don't think you can magnetize it for alternate hero/standard build (mostly because of the cape though if you go by just weapons and head it might be possible).

Seeker cavalry gained the Hellstiders soul hunter rule. Hellstriders however gained a 4+ save making making them more durable compared to seekers.

Video review for the battletome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UoXib2sY_s

Unfortunately for me it looks like I might not actually be doing the army, there is literally nothing in the tome for mortals. There isn't even a dedicated battalion for them in the book. Just looks like a book for daemons, disappointing imo.

Good to see the Fane is so user friendly. Even the base is separate.

 Geifer wrote:
Good to see the Fane is so user friendly. Even the base is separate.

If only the giant face wasn't attached to the portal (just my personal preference, I'd rather have it without the KoS face). I mean, it shouldn't be too hard to cut out. Plus, that gold and loot base would look great on the base of a kharadron ship.

Shouldn't we have 40k rules as well since the preview reviewers have the kits with the models and new rules?

GaroRobe wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
Good to see the Fane is so user friendly. Even the base is separate.

If only the giant face wasn't attached to the portal (just my personal preference, I'd rather have it without the KoS face). I mean, it shouldn't be too hard to cut out. Plus, that gold and loot base would look great on the base of a kharadron ship.

That's my preference as well, but the face looks like it's easily removed even with simple means, so I'm good with that.

I'll also say that I like the face more in unpainted plastic. The paint job doesn't do it any favors.

GaroRobe wrote:
If only the giant face wasn't attached to the portal (just my personal preference, I'd rather have it without the KoS face). I mean, it shouldn't be too hard to cut out. Plus, that gold and loot base would look great on the base of a kharadron ship.

It's not attached to the inside of the portal, only outer ring. It looks easy to cut away.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

GaroRobe wrote:
If only the giant face wasn't attached to the portal (just my personal preference, I'd rather have it without the KoS face). I mean, it shouldn't be too hard to cut out. Plus, that gold and loot base would look great on the base of a kharadron ship.

It's not attached to the inside of the portal, only outer ring. It looks easy to cut away.

That's what I meant. Pleasantly surprised that it wasn't attached to the portal part itself, though a hollow ring might look cool. Just got to drape it with chains or flayed skin or something.

 Virules wrote:
Shouldn't we have 40k rules as well since the preview reviewers have the kits with the models and new rules?

Well the Fane has no 40K logo on the box itself.
And I believe the Khorne altar had rules in the Vigilus book, so may be we'll have to wait a bit for the Fane rules in 40K if we get any.

{Double post: Delete}

No mortals means not interested. The only of the four chaos gods to not have mortal followers it seems.

GaroRobe wrote:

 Geifer wrote:
Good to see the Fane is so user friendly. Even the base is separate.

If only the giant face wasn't attached to the portal (just my personal preference, I'd rather have it without the KoS face). I mean, it shouldn't be too hard to cut out. Plus, that gold and loot base would look great on the base of a kharadron ship.

Hmmm... I hadn't thought of that but yeah that and the gold chest terrain piece would be great for a Kharadron base or terrains piece.

auticus wrote:
No mortals means not interested. The only of the four chaos gods to not have mortal followers it seems.

They've still got mortals, GW just hasn't fleshed them out in this edition of the tome; which makes some sense as the two they lost were older models and the plastics are all demonic. There's also warcry and likely slaves to darkness - both of which can provide mortals.

Thoguh I agree I'd have liked a new mortal based model, but I'm not going to let 1 missing troop type (possibly 2 in a duel kit) get me disappointed.

99% of my interest in the GW world was mortal chaos the past twenty years, so when they release a chaos faction and it has no mortals, thats a big ding for me.

The slaves to darkness mortals *could* work except the devs went a step further and made a lot of the powers key off of HEDONIST which is only in this book, whereas the other chaos books keyed off of the KHORNE, TZEENTCH, NURGLE key words.

The plus-side is that it saved me about $300 or so from going out and getting anything for it.

To be fair if chaos mortals are your thing sounds like you're more wiating for Slaves to Darkness Battletome

 Overread wrote:
To be fair if chaos mortals are your thing sounds like you're more wiating for Slaves to Darkness Battletome

Not necessarily. You could play any of the other three god armies as mortals.

 Overread wrote:
To be fair if chaos mortals are your thing sounds like you're more wiating for Slaves to Darkness Battletome

The other gods have their own mortals. What makes it worse is the fact that the keeper's command ability won't even work on slaves to darkness since it works off the hendonite keyword. Stop trying to justify GW's mishandling of this release. For many the loss our lords have caused them to lose all interest in the tome.

Mortals are our window into the setting. For christ sake they haven't even reboxed the hellstriders. This book is a gloried daemon battletome.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Overread wrote:
To be fair if chaos mortals are your thing sounds like you're more wiating for Slaves to Darkness Battletome

Not necessarily. You could play any of the other three god armies as mortals.

Yes but only Khorne has a fully well rounded mortal force. Nurgal then follows second with a decent size; Tzeentch has some support and then Slaanesh comes up last. Both Tzeentch and Slaanesh would need to take from other forces to have a decent army - although granted as of right now Slaanesh is the only one that can't take a lord and thus form a fully mortal force (at least outside of marked lords from Slaves to Darkness).

I mean I get that mortals is a draw and I want more mortals too, but at the same time unless its Khorn or Nurgle you've basically got to take allies to have a decent force anyway. So its not as if its only Slaanesh that needs more mortals within the demonic army. Slaanesh being ignored for so long it was bound to be that the release would either be huge or would have to focus on one half.

 Overread wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Overread wrote:
To be fair if chaos mortals are your thing sounds like you're more wiating for Slaves to Darkness Battletome

Not necessarily. You could play any of the other three god armies as mortals.

Yes but only Khorne has a fully well rounded mortal force. Nurgal then follows second with a decent size; Tzeentch has some support and then Slaanesh comes up last. Both Tzeentch and Slaanesh would need to take from other forces to have a decent army - although granted as of right now Slaanesh is the only one that can't take a lord and thus form a fully mortal force (at least outside of marked lords from Slaves to Darkness).

I mean I get that mortals is a draw and I want more mortals too, but at the same time unless its Khorn or Nurgle you've basically got to take allies to have a decent force anyway. So its not as if its only Slaanesh that needs more mortals within the demonic army. Slaanesh being ignored for so long it was bound to be that the release would either be huge or would have to focus on one half.

Tzaangors are a part of tzeentch's mortal faction. This is a poor comparison.

Ahh the GW store warscroll cards didn't list the Tzaangors as mortals.

Community posted a new image with a broken link.

Better image picture:

And it's gone. But the broken link had tomorrow's date so I expect we'll see it then...

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/04/28/coming-soon-looncurse/

Well.....Looks like I might of found an army to do over slaanesh. Was just discussing with my mates about focusing on revenants.

Ohhhhhh fancy!!

Winged tree lord!

So, probably the new HQ choice in the boxset, a new armybook, and probably some endless spells (and hopefully new tree terrain.)

And maybe get some Revenants with bows?

EDIT: Do his wings match the rumor engine pics?

I'm looking forward to the Gloomspite side of the box. I'm hoping for a new Loonboss on a Giant Cave Squig and a new Madcap Shaman.

GW did surprise us with an early launch of the Skaven and FEC tomes and such when Carrion Empire came around so I can well see GW doing the same now and pushing out Tome, Spells and Terrain (might not be needed since they technically do have terrain - in fact one of the oldest factions using faction terrain for decades now). I hope its the case, more Tomes!