• 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.

8th Ed. What is the very best Army Book lore of magic?

All of you have made fair points.

I was concerned that Toughness 6 may have been too much, especially as only some monsters ever reached such a high Toughness, and I agree that alongside the Poison Immunity and additional healing it would be too much. I will disregard that suggestion and keep the Ushabti as Toughness 5. That still adequately represents their stony constitution and adheres to @NIGHTBRINGER ‘s point of being able to damage stone more easily with heavy equipment - Great Weapon Troops will still be able to wound T5 Ushabti on 4s or 3s depending on their base Strength, which sounds right. I don’t want to make Tomb Kings overpowered anymore than I want to leave them underpowered. I simply chose Ushabti to be the benefit of a fair few buffs from my amendments because they just seem to be the weakest unit in the book from what I’ve heard from you all, and I felt they deserved the most to benefit from a little boost. However, I wish to improve the army in general, not just one unit, and have done so with the other listed amendments.

I only wish to introduce amendments to those factions that really need it, i.e. those that are toward the lower tiers of power (Tomb Kings, Bretonnia, Beastmen and probably Greenskins too) plus those that are higher tier but have outdated/incomplete army lists (Skaven and Chaos Dwarfs) - the former because I just don’t think it’s fair that players who just happen to like these armies have to pull out all the stops to make a decent list to have any chance of winning (particularly because of GW’s shit faction bias reasons), and as a perfectionist I want to see the latter given full GW-style 8th Ed rules for sake of completeness (Chaos Dwarfs in particular because they’re list is undersized and underdeveloped, as well as having at least one outdated rule). The whole point of playing a game is to have a roughly equal chance of winning and I want to make those chances a bit more balanced for everyone. Of course simply improving the weakest factions doesn’t solve all problems and will simply rearrange the tier table a little, but my amendments should make sure all the factions are closer together in terms of balance, and that is all I want.

To ensure this is the case, it’d be great if as many of you as possible could have a go at playtesting these amendments and reporting back to me, and I’d be happy to alter these amendments as necessary if anything is too strong or too weak. @NIGHTBRINGER @Lizards of Renown @BrotherSutek @Killer Angel @Imrahil are you up for the fun of doing this?

Factions that are middle tier and upwards already have pretty good rules and have no need to be improved anymore (even if some of their units are subpar, they have enough other units to make competent, thematic armies), and I will not condone any updates toward those factions because they simply aren’t necessary and I don’t want an arm’s race on our hands.

Of course you’re all perfectly at will to either take these amendments or leave them, but if you leave them, you’ll be missing out on amendments that will almost certainly make your gaming experience with Tomb Kings and other underpowered factions more fun. I’m not just doing this for me, I’m doing this for you, the players of those armies that need the most attention, because you deserve a reward for your patience and dedication. GW aren’t going to give us one anymore, and officialness carries much less weight now that they no longer support it, so might as well take action and use the second best thing.

If I can get a game in

I'm with @BrotherSutek to be honest...

It's few and far between for me now. If I get a chance to play, I'll be using the 8th rules just so that I can rapidly get the game done.

Sorry mate :(
 
I'm with @BrotherSutek to be honest...

It's few and far between for me now. If I get a chance to play, I'll be using the 8th rules just so that I can rapidly get the game done.

Sorry mate :(
+1

I only get to play pretty infrequently, and when I do, I like to stick to the official rules for the reasons I specified in my earlier posts.
 
Obviously the rule-makers have to make a choice at some point. I just wished their choice didn't massively go against TK's...
I just wish that whoever made the army list loved the army and knows the rules.
I'm not sure if the TK army book author, Robin Cruddace, is fully to blame. The Tomb Kings book was only the second army book, after Orcs & Goblins, to be released under 8th edition. If you compare it to that book, they are fairly well balanced against one another. Orcs & Goblins are little bit stronger, but they are in the same competitive sphere. He couldn't have known what decisions the authors of all the rest of the army books were going to do. Is it Robin Cruddace's fault that the TK are too weak or is it the fault of the authors of the WoC, DE and HE army books for making those armies too powerful?

I'm not clearing the guy of all wrongdoing, but simply pointing out that he was in a tough position at such an early stage of the 8th edition cycle. That said, there are definitely a few things that I wish he had done differently. The Vampire Counts were lucky due to the fact that they were released a bit later and they got to tweak the TK's shortcomings in order to better match up to the books that followed. It is a shame really. It wouldn't take all that much for GW to fix the Tomb Kings. Without touching any of the unit rules, a few tweaks of TK army special rules would make a massive difference. The book is rather interesting with some fun synergies, awesome & unique special characters and some creative mechanics. They are simply hampered too much by a few key rules.

6th edition TK were the most balanced army ever IMO and I loved it.
A bit before my time, but I have skimmed through the book and it looks to be pretty interesting and solid. I know a lot of people were pleased with that book.
 
The 6th edition book was balanced both internally and externally. You got very reliable magic but it wasn't OP and you had to go in a certain order. The synergy that was put into how the units ran was wonderful. One of my biggest dislikes of the 8th edition book is how with only a few changes we could have had the book for 7th and it would have been awesome! I'll stop there as I'm not being productive.
 
I'm with @BrotherSutek to be honest...

It's few and far between for me now. If I get a chance to play, I'll be using the 8th rules just so that I can rapidly get the game done.

Sorry mate :(

No probs, though it wouldn’t take a min to simply copy the rules in my quote onto a Word Doc, print them out and keep the page inside your book for easy reference (that’s assuming you have physical books rather than PDFs). But it’s your decision anyway :)
 
I'm not sure if the TK army book author, Robin Cruddace, is fully to blame. The Tomb Kings book was only the second army book, after Orcs & Goblins, to be released under 8th edition. If you compare it to that book, they are fairly well balanced against one another. Orcs & Goblins are little bit stronger, but they are in the same competitive sphere. He couldn't have known what decisions the authors of all the rest of the army books were going to do. Is it Robin Cruddace's fault that the TK are too weak or is it the fault of the authors of the WoC, DE and HE army books for making those armies too powerful?

I would certainly put the blame much more on the latter personally, because if it wasn’t for them escalating the powercreep for the ‘favourite’ factions things probably would be more balanced for everyone. Isn’t it suspicious that Warriors of Chaos, High Elves and Dark Elves were three of the most boosted factions in 7th Edition as well?

True, Cruddace isn’t the best games developer in the world and suffers from faction bias in 40K (GW must keep him firmly away from writing all future Tyranid and Imperial Guard Codices), but his Fantasy work was middling when he wrote it, neither too strong or too weak. Credit where credit’s due. I wonder what would have happened if he (or one other GW author) wrote the books for all the factions?

I'm not clearing the guy of all wrongdoing, but simply pointing out that he was in a tough position at such an early stage of the 8th edition cycle. That said, there are definitely a few things that I wish he had done differently. The Vampire Counts were lucky due to the fact that they were released a bit later and they got to tweak the TK's shortcomings in order to better match up to the books that followed.

Indeed, I wouldn’t have to work on these amendments if GW had made some of their own to bring Tomb Kings up to date with their aesthetically and lorewise inferior enemies, but we have to make do with either a subpar book or fan amendments to make it par. To be honest though I still think GW also had a clear faction bias toward Vampire Counts, because they got a 7th Edition book and Tomb Kings didn’t, plus two lots of releases in 8th Edition instead of the usual one per army. Funnily enough, High Elves, Warriors of Chaos and Dark Elves also benefitted from this outrageous display of favouritism.

It is a shame really. It wouldn't take all that much for GW to fix the Tomb Kings. Without touching any of the unit rules, a few tweaks of TK army special rules would make a massive difference. The book is rather interesting with some fun synergies, awesome & unique special characters and some creative mechanics. They are simply hampered too much by a few key rules.

Are there any other army special rules you think need a rework that I’ve missed out from my amendments? I’m interested to hear your thoughts
 
Are there any other army special rules you think need a rework that I’ve missed out from my amendments? I’m interested to hear your thoughts

Like I said, I prefer to play official rules only, but as a hypothetical exercise, these are the changes I would consider:
  • TK units can march if they are within 12" of the general
  • If the Hierophant is slain, another Liche High Priest or Liche Priest with the Lore of Nehekhara can take over his Hierophant duties
  • Restless Dead lore attribute may heal Animated Constructs 1 wound per casting (no longer limited to one wound per magic phase)
  • Units with the Nehekharan Undead rule can elect to hold or stand and shoot (where applicable) as per the normal BRB rules.
  • Fix the EBtS special rule. Remove the "Reclaimed by the Desert" outcome from the Mishap table. 1-3 = Buried Too Deep, 4-6 = Shifting Sands

That's pretty much it. Only army special rules changed and a minor tweak of the lore attribute. It's quick and easy. Messing with units and magic items invites the same to be done within every other army book (even weak units in already strong armies).

I still think they would be one of the weaker armies, but much more fair and competitive.
 
Like I said, I prefer to play official rules only, but as a hypothetical exercise, these are the changes I would consider:
  • TK units can march if they are within 12" of the general
  • If the Hierophant is slain, another Liche High Priest or Liche Priest with the Lore of Nehekhara can take over his Hierophant duties
  • Restless Dead lore attribute may heal Animated Constructs 1 wound per casting (no longer limited to one wound per magic phase)
  • Units with the Nehekharan Undead rule can elect to hold or stand and shoot (where applicable) as per the normal BRB rules.
  • Fix the EBtS special rule. Remove the "Reclaimed by the Desert" outcome from the Mishap table. 1-3 = Buried Too Deep, 4-6 = Shifting Sands

That's pretty much it. Only army special rules changed and a minor tweak of the lore attribute. It's quick and easy. Messing with units and magic items invites the same to be done within every other army book (even weak units in already strong armies).

I still think they would be one of the weaker armies, but much more fair and competitive.
I can't fault the logic the only two things I'd add to this is being able to charge when emerging from entombed as otherwise it's almost useless. Yes it has its moments but if you can't charge until 3rd turn at best... the other thing is the magic spell we have for our number 6 slot. It's criminally weak for a number 6spell, instead I'd go with the storm of Magic golden age spell. Even if only allowed on the heirophant it would be so much better a buff that this army desperately needs.
 
I'd add to this is being able to charge when emerging from entombed as otherwise it's almost useless.
In such a case, I think you'd have to remove the rule entirely from a unit like the Necropolis Knights. That unit is too strong to just be able to pop up anywhere and hit an enemy unit in the rear or flank. On things like Scorpions, I think it would work well.
 
I’m late to the party on this but love these kinds of discussions. What I quite like about some of the AB lores is the synergy a number of them have with their respective armies. VC and Ogres are the stand out on that front and both are excellent but VC top the table for me. Lore of High magic is also superb. It is maybe let down a bit by being such a jack of all trades and I think it probably complements Lizards more than HEs (though I prefer the attribute on HEs and I’ll more often take the lore on WEs over either of the other two armies).
I’ll have to give a shout out to LoS too. One of my regular opponents crippled my flying Doombull with that damned random movement spell :D:D
 
Here goes.

Unlike the Lore of Vampires, I feel that the Lore of Slaanesh (LoS), has a couple of "dud" spells, or more specifically, spells that are situational. However, what the lore has, are some of the very best spells in the game (but only if the general is savvy enough to unlock their potential).

Before I get into why I think the Lore of Slaanesh is extremely awesome, let me summarize what I feel are some of its shortfalls:
  • poor lore attribute
  • underwhelming signature spell (I would very rarely trade for it)
  • a few situational spells
  • requires a bit more strategy, foresight and skill to properly employ

Before we get to the really good stuff, lets look at what I feel are the 4 weaker spells of the lore:

Lash of Slaanesh
(signature spell)➨ more often than not, I'd consider this to be the very weakest that the LoS has to offer. It requires exceptionally fortunate positioning in order to effect a large enough number of models to make it potentially worthwhile and even then, it's only inflicting S3 hits.

Pavane of Slaanesh➨ a sniper spell that is hampered by the fact that it only has the potential to inflict a single wound. If your opposition has mediocre leadership (especially when outside of the general and BSB bubbles) it has a very good chance of going through (as it ignores armour), but the single wound limitation really hurts it. A situational spell that will come in handy once in a while, but is nothing special.

Slicing Shards➨ this is LoS' version of LoN's "Rancid Visitations", only not nearly as good. The LoN offering is at S5 and involves a toughness test to continue dealing damage while Slicing Shards is only S4 (though armour piercing) and replaces the toughness test with a leadership test. This means that Slicing Shards is more or less limited to units outside of the general/BSB. That said, should you successfully land it on an isolated target with poor leadership, it can be very effective.

Phantasmagoria➨ a reverse cold blooded. Obviously not as good against certain armies (DoC, TK, VC), but even against these it has its uses as it couples nicely with Pavane of Slaanesh, Hysterical Frenzy (failed frenzy checks) and especially Slicing Shards. Against other armies, the effect on their leadership tests has all sorts of uses, including the panic tests caused by the Hellcannon (which are already at -1 leadership). A useful spell (sometimes VERY useful), but not what makes the LoS so good in my eyes.


Now we get to what makes the LoS really shine, which are its top 3 spells. The game of Warhammer is won and lost in the movement phase!! All the other phases of the game rely directly on the movement phase; whether that be setting up advantageous close combats or moving into shooting/magic range (or moving to neutralize enemy shooting/magic threats). The movement phase ultimately dictates who will win and who will lose, so a spell lore that has not one, not two, but THREE ways to control enemy movement is extremely dangerous in the right hands. The LoS literally gives you the ability to seize control of your opponent's army from him/her. Without further ado,

Hysterical Frenzy➨ a RIP hex/augment that allows you to grant frenzy to one of your units or one of your opponents units (the affected unit also suffers D6 S3 hits at the end of each magic phase, but this is pretty inconsequential). This versatile spell has a lot to offer:
  • cast it on your troops to increase their attack output (this is the most simplistic and obvious use). This also works on units that already have frenzy. The ideal target for the spell would be something like the Skullcrushers as it would grant +1 attack to both the rider and the Juggernaut mount. We know how good Skullcrushers are, now imagine them with 8 attacks per model!! Additionally, if you cast the spell on something that isn't Frenzied to start, you can avoid a potential forced pursue/overrun by ending the spell prior to having to make such a move (RIP spells can be ended at anytime by the controlling player).
  • casting it on your troops to make them Immune to Psychology (due to Frenzy)
  • casting it on an opponent in an attempt to have them fail their Frenzy check and force them into a poor charge [controlling enemy movement]
  • casting it on an opponent to force them to overrun/pursue when it is disadvantageous for them to do so. Excellent in the chaff/redirection game [controlling enemy movement]
As good as Hysterical Frenzy is, the two best spells of the Lore are Acquiescence and Cacophonic Choir. Although Cacophonic Choir is usually the more feared of the two spells, Acquiescence in many people's eyes is just as good if not better than Cacophonic Choir due to its extremely modest casting cost and its increased range. Cacophonic Choir obviously has the added effect of damaging enemy units (even when engaged in CC) and can be bubbled. At the heart of both hex spells, they both impart ASL and Random Movement (D6). It is these effects I will discuss below:

Acquiescence and Cacophonic ChoirStraight away, ASL is amazing for neutralizing the ASF (and re-rolls to hit) that those pesky Elves enjoy. This is a huge bonus against the Elves, who account for some of the very strongest armies in the game. Additionally, against other armies, ASL can be very useful in giving WoC's less initiative-inclined units (Trolls, Ogres, etc.) a chance to strike before their enemies. Now onto the many uses of the Random Movement (D6) effect:
  • neutralizing the greatest asset of quick moving units (fast cavalry, flyers, etc) by preventing them from being able to move into a position where they can do their work. A flyer for instance will have its 20" flying march move reduced to an average of 3.5".
  • keeping out-of-position units from re-entering the game
  • preventing an enemy unit from charging anything outside of 6" (as their charge distance will be limited to D6")
  • all but assuring that a victorious enemy CC unit will be unable to successful catch and destroy your unit that broke from combat (the enemy will pursue D6")
  • all but assuring that your victorious CC unit will successfully catch and destroy your opponent's unit that has broken from combat (they only flee D6")
  • greatly increasing the chances of catching a fleeing enemy unit on the table when you declare a charge against it (they only flee D6")
  • forcing "Move or Fire" units to move, and thereby preventing them from shooting (this is great against War Machines)
  • forcing a unit to move that is under a spell (or terrain effect) that penalizes them for doing so
  • setting up bottlenecks, where units behind the affected unit are now limited in how/where they can move
The possibilities are nearly endless. The effect on the game is catastrophic. Admittedly it is not as easy to implement as a lore that simply deals out a bunch of damage, but in the right hands it literally allows a player to remove his/her opponent's control of their army. It is a finesse lore that is a bit more subtle in its effects, but offers something that can't be found in any other lore. It is a tactician's delight.

If playing the lore of Slaanesh I always recommend that it be fielded on a level 4 wizard with a Chaos Familiar. You really want to obtain the best three spells of the lore, and rolling for 5 spells greatly increases the odds.

Anyways, that's probably enough for now. Thoughts, comments?
Here is someone else's take on the Lore of Slaanesh:

https://hoodlinghole.blogspot.com/2013/02/lores-of-magic-lore-of-slaanesh.html
 
Back
Top