8th Ed. How do our monsters Fare?

I've just been comparing our monsters to the other factions counterparts, and really we seem to be getting the short end of the stick from my perspective. Am I right, or am I just looking at it the wrong way?

I mean there is no surprise in that the Troglodon is bad, and while the stegadon fares quite well, and I guess the Bastiladon because of the pricing, the Carnosaur does not seem to hold up. And even while some fares well, they just seem on par with others, which I find a bit sad, since we have an army that, in my opinion at least, have access to some of the better ones, since it should be one of the army's strenghts, and that we can get monsters in every category but core.

 

I’m surprised you say the Carnosaur is bad compared to other factions’ monsters, because with its multiple wounds (D3) special rule I see it as a great monster-killing monster, as it were. I think only the really big ones like the Ogre Kingdoms monsters and the Arachnarok stand much of a chance in being able to defeat the Carnosaur, and the Thundertusk would struggle as even though it forces everything else to strike last, it has few attacks on its own and is more of an infantry-killer. You’ve got the Ogre Riders as well but I’m pretty sure they’re still only S4 so are wounding on 5s. Also having monsters in core would allow Lizardmen players to field entire armies of monsters if they wanted to, which would be a bit OP for any opponent that doesn’t play Dwarfs or Empire, especially if they’re up against an army of Carnosaurs. No army can currently take Monsters as core as far as I remember (Ogres can have Monstrous Infantry but never monsters).

 

I think monsters are generally underpowered in 8th. Infantry got buffed and most monsters can't hack through Steadfast. When i think of strong monsters, i think of the Frosthearth Phoenix, the Nurgleprince (even though it is a Lord), Stardragons, Hellcannons and perhaps a Hydra and a Khemrian Warsphinx. Those are quite a few monsters from quite a few lists, so i feel as if we have bitten the short end of the stick here, which is pretty weird. As an interesting counterpoint, at some point in 9th we really had a Monstermash list (due to the Carnosaur's saves being mixed with its rider), in 8th we were far from a monster focused list. Our strength lies in our Slann, Skinks and Salamanders, not monsters. The Stegadon and Bastiladon are medium at best, and do not get me started on Troglodons.

 

These are some of the monsters that I think fare better than ours do...

• Hell Pit Abomination (Skaven)
• Aracknoarok Spider (Orcs & Goblins)
• Hierotitan (Tomb Kings)
• Terrorgheist (Vampire Counts)
• Daemon Prince (Warriors of Chaos)
• Chimera (Warriors of Chaos)
• Hellcannon (Warriors of Chaos & Chaos Dwarfs)
• Greater Daemons (Daemons of Chaos)
• Soul Grinder (Daemons of Chaos)
• Frostheart Phoenix (High Elves)
• Flamespire Phoenix (High Elves)
• Treeman (Wood Elves)
• K'daai Destroyer (Chaos Dwarfs)

I might have missed a few, but those are the ones I could think of.

I feel that most other armies, while not having access to as many monsters as we do, have access to at least a better one. Of all our monsters, I think only the Stegadon is truly competitive (and even that is limited due to cannons).

The Carnosaur is a sub-optimal choice in my opinion for several reasons:

• mediocre toughness for a combat monster
• poor saves (no Ward of regeneration to help against cannons)
• does not fly
• can only be fielded as a mount (thus simultaneously risking your character and monster to a single cannonball)
• no real game changing special rule (like the Hierotitan or Terrorgheist has)

So with the Carno we are left with a mount-only combat monster with M7 and WS3 with extremely poor defense. The Carno is also massively overshadowed by the cheaper and better Scar-vet / Oldblood cowboys on cold ones.

 

Not that every good monster needs to be on the list, but I would add the Dark elf Hydra and Kharibdyss, Necrosphinx and Khemrian Warsphinx from Tomb Kings

I agree; Sure it does seem good at Strength 7 and doing D3 wounds, but with only 4 attacks and 5 when frenzied (most other combat monsters seem to start on 5, so really the blood frenzy is pretty much strictly worse than other monsters having 5 attacks base), when then taken into account it only has WS 3 it will statistically only hit half of its attacks (and WS 3 really is the lowest for among monsters and granted a lot of monsters do indeed have WS 3 themselves, that does not however make the WS 3 any better). A lot of monsters has WS 4, so they would in terms of hitting, be much better suited to kill other monsters, the Aracknoarok Spider is for instance almost on par with our carnosaur in terms of damage output from what I have tested.
Getting back to the hits; We then at best have 2.5 hits, and let's say we fight another monster with middeling Toughness of 5, it then wounds on a 2+ which means that it wills score roughly 2 wounds, which if they are not saved, would become 4 wounds (on average).
Now in comparison take the dark elf hydra (Now I know this monster is very likely undercosted but still). Against our Carnosaur, it would do roughly 2.5 wounds and is not even a designated monster killer, and has a protection against anything since it can regenerate, and has the same Toughness and save. While being undercosted, it is 60 points cheaper than our Carnosaur, and crucially does not rely on its upgrades, they only give it a further use by giving it a ranged and/or a breath attack.
Then there is the issue of the Carnosaur only having Initiative 2, and fair enough it is a Lizardmen unit, and Initiative generally is not our strongest suit, unless you are a skink, but it does mean that it will always strike at the same time, or very often after other monsters.

That would be OP yes, maybe I phrased it badly, but I didn't suggest that we should have had monsters as core.

For that brief time in the 9th age it was glorious

Okay, but if not a strength of our army, then certainly a potential focal point, that just doesn't really work well. And tbh I don't think Skinks was supposed to be the army's strength, rather I think it is a side effect of how well skirmishers work as re-directors in higher levels of play.
With Salamanders I see it as some of our small "monsters" being effective, just as Terradons and Rippers have their uses and really they are just smalelr beasts, and I do think the intention was to make our base Saurus with a bit of skinks, supported by beasts and a Slann for magic; In the end though Only the smaller beasts really made the cut though.

 

The list was composed of monsters that are better than ours. Since the Stegadon is our best monster, all the ones I listed are better choices than the Steg.

The Necrosphinx is definitely not better than the Steg. S5 and not enough attacks do limit its use (and relying on the HKB is risky). The Warsphinx is a decent monster, but it is so slow! Remember that it cannot march so it has the effective movement speed of a marching Dwarf. Toughness 8 is really nice, but it's 5+ armour really let it down once the opponent sneaks a few 6's through (or poisons it!). I would most definitely not put either of these above the Stegadon.

I have much less experience with the Kharibdyss and Hydra. Would you classify them as better than the Steg? I know the Hydra was a killer in the previous DE army book, but I think it has been toned down a bit. I could be mistaken though.

 

Fair enough when you compare to the steg, and I guess the necroshpinx is not better then, but it does have potential with that HKB, that can be gamechanging, and with Toughness 8 might be able to live through a potent combat lord's attacks to outright kill in return.

Regarding the Hydra and Karibdyss I must confess that I have not played against them, so I cannot say for certain, but given that they both have a nice statline for 160 points, and the Hydra can heal, while having 8 attacks when at full health, and the Kharibdyss having WS 5, Strength 7, Initiative 4, 5 attacks with poison and two quite nice special rules that make enemies in Base contact re-roll succesful LD tests and if all its attacks hit a single model, then the models suffers an additional D6 Strength 7 attacks.
Bascially the Kharibdyss is as good of a monster hunter as our Carnosaur, with just one less movement and no swifstride, but more survivable due to WS 5 and at 60 points less. If compared to a Stegadon I would argue that both are superior, if nothing else then due to their points cost.

 

What would it take for all our monsters to become competitive? Not necessarily the best or anything, just usable without throwing points out the window?

 

Have a look at my latest post in my Unofficial Ninth Edition brainstorming thread - I’ve thought of some ways to huff up the Carnosaur’s profile in particular, and I haven’t even started thinking about special rules yet...

 

Somehow I missed that post.

I like the changes, but feel it goes a bit against what the monster is intended to do, since it is not a tank. I am actually fine with it being a bit of a glass cannon, but it needs to be good at what it does. Personally I would give it swiftstride and bloodroar for free and then give it +1 to hit and +1 Attack against large targets, and still keep it at 220 points, or possibly take it down to 200. I think that would cement it as a true monster hunter.

I love the T7 on the Bastiladon though.

 

As I say I haven’t got round to Special Rules yet, but those are all options to bear in mind.

I gave the Bastiladon T7 because I remember you gave it T8 in your 8th update, but I thought that was just a tad too much considering Sphinxes are T8 too and they are made of stone.

 

That is a fair point, though I have made a more toned down version of my changes where it is Toughness 7.

 

Settra does not serve...



Speaking of Sphinxes, would they not be deserving of at least a 4+ armour save? Or immunity from poison?

 

They certainly should have immunity to poison, pretty much the whole army should imo.

Don't know about the armor save, they don't have any armor right? and it is just a matter of cutting through the stone, that being the toughness 8?
Maybe a small ward save for being a construct?

 

It has a fair bit of armour to be honest. Plus if the Stegadon has scaly skin, surely a giant stone statue could too.

 

I definitively agree that each of our monsters has a purpose, but most just does not deliver for their points I feel.
And sure everything can be solved with points changes, and that is fine to an extent, but I do think there is a point to be made not to be the only balance option, though of course it is the easiest change to make. I will admit than I'm more interested in making each unit as close to lore as possible, so that is why I do not think only changing points is the be-all end-all. I guess it's just down to personal preference.

Yeah okay, that does seem quite sturdy. I would argue a 3+ AS, but probably take a 4+ to not make it too good, either that or make it very expensive, since a Toughness 8 AS 3 monster with HKB seems quite strong.
I think strength 6 is warranted as well tbh, Strength 5 seems low for that thing.

 

T8 and 3+ would be extremely potent. I'd be happy with 4+ (though I wouldn't complain with 3+ )

Remember that the HKB is only for one of his attacks. The rest only have regular killing blow. So the chances of hitting that HKB is extremely low.

This would make all the difference in the world. S5 is what really drags these things down. Couple that we with the armour save boost, and you would have a really solid monster.

 

That's right, I forgot, still good though, and Killing blow is still good if it gets into infantry.

Yup, S6 is so much better than S5, and the same for Toughness, I feel that is the general issue monsters have, Strength and Toughness 5 just isn't enough generally.

 

The problem for the Necrosphinx (but not the Warsphinx) is that it doesn't have enough attacks to take on infantry. At the same time, S5 isn't really strong enough to take on other monsters.