• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

GW News: LAS VEGAS OPEN 2025

Looks like my suspicions were confirmed:
402256130_10160318339708375_3020363691054697091_n.jpg


Looking forward to some lovely Tomb Kings content! :woot:
 
hype train commencing.

plans to build a cavalry army from Numas using Wargames Atlantic Plastics are intensifying.
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
  1. Unless I am missing a key piece of the rules, I don't see where the Cursed Blades incantation specifies that it is restricted to CC. The way I read the rules on the spell card, the spell is applicable to both shooting and close combat. I like spells that provide such flexibility.
Click to expand...

I think it was simply because the name of the spell inclines that it is intended to buff units in close combat that I thought that, like the 8th version, it was intended purely for close combat. As you say, though, unlike the 8th Edition version it doesn't explicitly state that it is intended for close combat. Allowing it to boost units' shooting as well certainly already makes it more useful and gives it more viable targets.

NIGHTBRINGER said:
2. I believe the Cursed Blades incantation might effect multiple units. It specifies that it effects "any friendly unit that has the Nehekharan Undead special rule and that is within the caster's Command range". It doesn't state any one unit. Personally I would have liked for it to be written more clearly; the inclusion of the words "all units" would have been helpful, but based on what little context we have, I'd say the RAW interpretation makes it a bubble spell (the rest of the TOW rules might clarify this in one direction or the other though). The constraint of the Nehekharan Undead rule is not much of an issue in a TK army. So it comes down to how big the command range is. If it is 12" for instance, that's quite a few units in that bubble. Even at a paltry 6", you can fit a few key units in there.
Click to expand...

And again, this is certainly a fair point. It would have been clearer if it had been written as 'All friendly units with the Nehekharan Undead special rule within the caster's command range may re-roll to Hit rolls of 1' or something along that effect, but certainly one could interpret the wording of the spell as-is to mean all units within the caster's command range, and again that would boost its usefulness by a long way.
 
Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl said:
I think it was simply because the name of the spell inclines that it is intended to buff units in close combat that I thought that, like the 8th version, it was intended purely for close combat. As you say, though, unlike the 8th Edition version it doesn't explicitly state that it is intended for close combat. Allowing it to boost units' shooting as well certainly already makes it more useful and gives it more viable targets.



And again, this is certainly a fair point. It would have been clearer if it had been written as 'All friendly units with the Nehekharan Undead special rule within the caster's command range may re-roll to Hit rolls of 1' or something along that effect, but certainly one could interpret the wording of the spell as-is to mean all units within the caster's command range, and again that would boost its usefulness by a long way.
Click to expand...
If we were to assume that those two interpretations are correct, would that change you opinion of the spell's power level in comparison with the other two spells discussed?
 
FINALLY! AT LONG LAST! TONIGHT WE'LL HAVE A LOOK AT THE TOMB KINGS!

Not only that, but Deathwing Knights have already been leaked:


See you in <2 hours! (sorry Europe time!)
 
Last edited:
NIGHTBRINGER said:
Click to expand...

I mean, i agree.

I need an answer to why, though? please. Technically its a nice dragon model and in-line with Warhammer fantasy Dragon asthetics and shape.

And I'm getting one. but not because of that.

Because of Bast's chosen, here.

upload_2023-11-17_23-36-42.png
 
Lord-Marcus said:
I mean, i agree.

I need an answer to why, though? please. Technically its a nice dragon model and in-line with Warhammer fantasy Dragon asthetics and shape.

And I'm getting one. but not because of that.

Because of Bast's chosen, here.

View attachment 140782
Click to expand...
in my case I dislike it cause it looks like an AOS kit and a poorly designed one at that.
 
Lord-Marcus said:
I need an answer to why, though? please.
Click to expand...
For a whole bunch of reasons:
  1. It doesn't fit the Egyptian aesthetics of the Tomb Kings. Sure they put some Egyptian ornamentation on it, but simply put, a dragon (even an undead skeletal one) feels out of place in a TK army.
  2. It has no 8th edition analogue and so would serve no practical purpose in my army.
  3. It looks to be an overwhelmingly fragile model. All those long thin extruding plastic bits are just looking to get caught on a sleeve.
  4. It doesn't appear to be an incredibly fun model to paint. Trying to get into all the nooks and crannies would tedious.
  5. It should have been a Khemric Titan. Now that would have been a centerpiece (while simultaneously addressing each and every point mentioned above).

Lord-Marcus said:
This guy isn't wrong, either:

View attachment 140783
Click to expand...
I just can't believe that GW would put such focus on the Tomb Kings and not address the most basic and outdated element in the army. Even for GW that seems foolish. Then again, they are creating a game that largely ignores the majority of the coolest factions. :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top