Ghoul Kings - I just don't get it.
- Thread starter RobTheWise
- Start date
-
The masquerade of murder returns! A new game of Vampires Amongst Us has begun. Unmask the killers, trust no one, and try to survive the night. Find out more and sign up now!
lost_shadow
Ghoul
I cant put a ghoul king into my list.
I have tried to make a good list containing one, I see the advantage of them being a cheaper combat vampire lord level character.
But honestly, you can put 500pts into a normal vampire lord and 'deny' the enemy those victory points.
I usually go with
Red fury
quickblood
Great weapon
Talisman of preservation
Trickstar's helm
So you strike first (well Iniative order) with 5 S7 attacks with red fury, enough to down any monster in one round most likely, or maybe 2 rounds.
Against you they then have to re roll to wound (Against S3 its basically a re rollable save at 5s to wound)
Then a 4+ ward save
I also run two other vampires with the idea of many attack for low T model, my lord is the one that goes monster/ high T hunting while 2 vampires with red fury and +attack weapons find some normal guys to kill.
Hes a tough model to kill, I know he is better with a mount dawnstone but I run a completely infantry army at the moment.
I have tried to make a good list containing one, I see the advantage of them being a cheaper combat vampire lord level character.
But honestly, you can put 500pts into a normal vampire lord and 'deny' the enemy those victory points.
I usually go with
Red fury
quickblood
Great weapon
Talisman of preservation
Trickstar's helm
So you strike first (well Iniative order) with 5 S7 attacks with red fury, enough to down any monster in one round most likely, or maybe 2 rounds.
Against you they then have to re roll to wound (Against S3 its basically a re rollable save at 5s to wound)
Then a 4+ ward save
I also run two other vampires with the idea of many attack for low T model, my lord is the one that goes monster/ high T hunting while 2 vampires with red fury and +attack weapons find some normal guys to kill.
Hes a tough model to kill, I know he is better with a mount dawnstone but I run a completely infantry army at the moment.
But a expensive Vampire Lord does not deny VPs at all. One misscast and he is dead, one lucky killing blow and he is dead, one character who can put even our characters in their place and he is dead. Then you are 600+ vps in the hole and without a general.
As Sanai once said, better to go down in a blaze of glory atop a roaring beast than cowering behind a few zombies and tripping over a pebble. I'm much more reckless with my generals, especially now it doesn't necessarily mean curtains. (What with saving crumble with another vampire.)
The Ghoul King fits that perfectly; chuck him on a Terrogheist with Curse of the Revenant, Skabscrath and a Dragonbane Gem, and you're looking at some serious Fusrodah.
The Ghoul King fits that perfectly; chuck him on a Terrogheist with Curse of the Revenant, Skabscrath and a Dragonbane Gem, and you're looking at some serious Fusrodah.
I have been noticing more and more that both Shadow and Death out perform our lore. Thus with the GK I take Lore of Vampires and then all my other casters are rocking a army book lore. Ghouls toughness 4 becomes a nightmare for S3 when you knock their strength down a pip.
Johnny-Crass said:I have been noticing more and more that both Shadow and Death out perform our lore. Thus with the GK I take Lore of Vampires and then all my other casters are rocking a army book lore. Ghouls toughness 4 becomes a nightmare for S3 when you knock their strength down a pip.
So no secondary Vamp Lore casters to mitigate crumble?
Isn't the lack of Invocation also a problem?
I'm guessing it heavily depends on the kind of list you're playing.
Do you mind sharing your list?
EDIT: Don't bother, found your lists.
lost_shadow said:
I'd love to come up against that build. No re-rolls to hit, little armour
There are plenty of ways to take down a Vampire Lord. It doesn't matter how many points you spend.
lost_shadow
Ghoul
True its little armour, but effectivly its a double ward save with re rolls to wound against him
I usually dont cast with my vampire lord, I stick to secondary hero casters so he wont miscast.
Plus lore of shadow can teleport him away from killing blow, I know hes not much on the defensive, but hes still better than a ghoul king of the same points value.
5 S7 attacks, sure theres no re rolls but its enough to do some serious damage and he will strike before most opponents
it is FAR easier to kill a ghoul king than it is a vampire lord, with only his 5+ reg and a 2+ ward against flaming, he can easily be killed, against anything with S4 or more is going to go straight through that 5+ regen.
Imagine 6 models in base contact including supporting attacks, with 1 attack each there is likely to be 1 or maybe 2 wounds per turn on a ghoul king, with a vampire lord they have to ro roll to wound with my setup
so lets say all 6 models hit, even with S5 and all wounded half will then fail on average with the trickstar's helm re rolls, then a 4+ ward and another 50% should fail leaving 1 maybe 2 wounds against the vampire lord if they are lucky.
Now against a ghoul king, lets say 6 models hit him at S5 and all wound, no re roll and a 5+ regen, 4 of those wounds are likely to go through killing him
Thats the worst case scenario yes, but I see everything statistically
Fair enough if people find ways to use them and they work well, but I see them even when fully buffed out they only have a 5+ (or 4+ with mortis engine) regen save and nothing else.
In most scenarios ghoul kings will die far easier than vampire lords,
I also dont think killing blow is a valid argument to say, as this is true of all characters out there and theres little we can do except teleport our lord away frm such units
I would however like to face a character that can easily survive 5 strength 7 attacks at iniative 7 with red fury, any character that has less than T6 is going down in one turn (-4 to armour should take care of that) They may have a ward, but most likely a 4+ and they will still take damage.
I usually dont cast with my vampire lord, I stick to secondary hero casters so he wont miscast.
Plus lore of shadow can teleport him away from killing blow, I know hes not much on the defensive, but hes still better than a ghoul king of the same points value.
5 S7 attacks, sure theres no re rolls but its enough to do some serious damage and he will strike before most opponents
it is FAR easier to kill a ghoul king than it is a vampire lord, with only his 5+ reg and a 2+ ward against flaming, he can easily be killed, against anything with S4 or more is going to go straight through that 5+ regen.
Imagine 6 models in base contact including supporting attacks, with 1 attack each there is likely to be 1 or maybe 2 wounds per turn on a ghoul king, with a vampire lord they have to ro roll to wound with my setup
so lets say all 6 models hit, even with S5 and all wounded half will then fail on average with the trickstar's helm re rolls, then a 4+ ward and another 50% should fail leaving 1 maybe 2 wounds against the vampire lord if they are lucky.
Now against a ghoul king, lets say 6 models hit him at S5 and all wound, no re roll and a 5+ regen, 4 of those wounds are likely to go through killing him
Thats the worst case scenario yes, but I see everything statistically
Fair enough if people find ways to use them and they work well, but I see them even when fully buffed out they only have a 5+ (or 4+ with mortis engine) regen save and nothing else.
In most scenarios ghoul kings will die far easier than vampire lords,
I also dont think killing blow is a valid argument to say, as this is true of all characters out there and theres little we can do except teleport our lord away frm such units
I would however like to face a character that can easily survive 5 strength 7 attacks at iniative 7 with red fury, any character that has less than T6 is going down in one turn (-4 to armour should take care of that) They may have a ward, but most likely a 4+ and they will still take damage.
I used to think the same as the OP on regards to ghoul kings, until I tried them out myself. My personal list fields a ghoul king with sword of bloodshed, potion of strength, dragonbane gem, and red fury. 8 attacks each round and for one round strength 8? Yes please. This is only 395 points, so in a 2400 point game (which is what I play most of the time) I can bring a level 4 master necromancer as well! Putting all your eggs in one basket (making your vampire your wizard) just doesn't seem smart to me anymore and that's where having a ghoulking can come in handy. Not to mention the fluff and the models are awesome!
Which units do you put your Ghoul King in?
I've tried Ghouls, and while it makes a killer unit the unit draws alot of fire.
Zombies screw him on CR, and Skeletons kinda do too. Sure Skeletons are alittle better due to their parry saves and the small possibility they might actually kill something, but they usually lose several Skellies in the process, and the Ghoul King is spending most of his wounds making up for the wounds lost to the skellies.
Fielding a Banshee in the unit helps it's overall damage output, but their damage is done during the shooting phase, and doesn't help CR.
I've thought about putting a Wight King, or Cairn Wraith in there, but it seems like alot of extra points just to make the Ghoul King win fights.
Maybe i'm just using him wrong?
I've tried Ghouls, and while it makes a killer unit the unit draws alot of fire.
Zombies screw him on CR, and Skeletons kinda do too. Sure Skeletons are alittle better due to their parry saves and the small possibility they might actually kill something, but they usually lose several Skellies in the process, and the Ghoul King is spending most of his wounds making up for the wounds lost to the skellies.
Fielding a Banshee in the unit helps it's overall damage output, but their damage is done during the shooting phase, and doesn't help CR.
I've thought about putting a Wight King, or Cairn Wraith in there, but it seems like alot of extra points just to make the Ghoul King win fights.
Maybe i'm just using him wrong?
lost_shadow
Ghoul
I still fail to see how they are any good.
If they are in a challenge, they are great, but against ANY unit they die in one turn with the items ect that you say they should have.
if they have red fury, dragonbane gem and sword of bloodshed thats ok.
There will be a minimum of 6 models targetting them, perhaps 9 in horde formation.
Ghoul king strikes firet, maybe killing 8-16 models, but if ANYTHING strike back he is dead in one turn, a 5+ regen wont save him
Ive play tested against my vampire lord with those items I had, and my lord won 7 out of 10 challenges with the ghoul king, mainly because if they ghoul king fluffs up his attack (its 4+ to hit with re rolls as the ghoul has lower WS, then 2s to wound (ogre blade) which with the trickstar's helm usually negates 1 attack per turn) then a 4+ ward.
There was 1 battle where the ghoul king slew my lord in the first round of the challenge
the other 2 my lord lasted 3 turns of combat each time, the other 5 I killed the ghoul king in one round of combat, the other 2 it went on only for 2 rounds
If the ghoul king doesnt do 3 wounds against me, even with 1 wound left I might have no re rolls but im hitting on 3s, wounding on 2s and then red fury, I get 3-4 hits on average, 2-3 wounds on average and 2 usually fail their saves on average(only a 5+ regen), but then with red fury the extra attacks finish him off.
I dont doubt hes great for a cheap lord, but against any unit that can strike back they can and will break through and kill him, he may be cheap but its an extra 100pts for killing your general.
Ill admist that the trickstar's helm, talisman of preservation and great weapon is a combo that looks bad on paper, but really has to be played to apprcciete the strength off it, its one of those combos where (an experienced player) wont just throw heroes at a vamp hoping to kill him, they will attack him with ordinary troops first and learn what items he has, when they see T5, which wounds must be re rolled and a 4+ ward when hes striking with a great weapon first against 85-90% of lords, it may just make them think twice about facing him.
With that setup its not about killing power in numbers, its about such strength that he can take almost any foe down before they can strike, and if they do the best they can do against him is 1-2 wounds
And I also did a combat test against normal S3 troops, which turns out from 5 rounds of combat my vamp lord suffered 1 wound in the whole 5 rounds (9 hits at S3)
The ghoul king suffered a wound in every round except 1 lucky round where I passed all the regen saves, he also died in one round of combat
Next I tested great weapons against him assuming the enemy is in horde formation (9 attacks at strength 5)
Out of 5 rounds of 9 S5 hits (assuming its 4+ to hit and 4+ to wound, he can easily take 3-4 wounds and fail them on a 5+regen)
My vamp lord died in 1 of them, was wounded once in 1 of them and suffered no wounds in 3 rounds of combat
The ghoul king died in 2 of them, and was reduced to one wound in the others and thats just 1 round of combat with no buffs.
Maybe my brain doesnt work the same way as everyone who likes ghoul kings, and im not saying im against them in the sense of starting an argument over them, I just fail to see how they can survive at all.
With ghoul kings, if they dont kill everything around them, chances are they will die.
But a vampire lord with my setup can afford to fluff up a round of combat and he should still survive.
My win lose draw counter isnt great, but in each game my lord has never died while having this combo as most players dont bother trying to kill him once they see what he has and just concentrate on the unit.
Maybe im just crazy, but I cant field a 300pts +100pts lord with only a 5+ regeneraion save, it just seems recklass
Feel free to try and convince me, but I like to keep my general alive. I see that the ghoul king is cheaper and more offensive, but for the same points value a vampire lord can beat him, not easily but its more in his favour
If they are in a challenge, they are great, but against ANY unit they die in one turn with the items ect that you say they should have.
if they have red fury, dragonbane gem and sword of bloodshed thats ok.
There will be a minimum of 6 models targetting them, perhaps 9 in horde formation.
Ghoul king strikes firet, maybe killing 8-16 models, but if ANYTHING strike back he is dead in one turn, a 5+ regen wont save him
Ive play tested against my vampire lord with those items I had, and my lord won 7 out of 10 challenges with the ghoul king, mainly because if they ghoul king fluffs up his attack (its 4+ to hit with re rolls as the ghoul has lower WS, then 2s to wound (ogre blade) which with the trickstar's helm usually negates 1 attack per turn) then a 4+ ward.
There was 1 battle where the ghoul king slew my lord in the first round of the challenge
the other 2 my lord lasted 3 turns of combat each time, the other 5 I killed the ghoul king in one round of combat, the other 2 it went on only for 2 rounds
If the ghoul king doesnt do 3 wounds against me, even with 1 wound left I might have no re rolls but im hitting on 3s, wounding on 2s and then red fury, I get 3-4 hits on average, 2-3 wounds on average and 2 usually fail their saves on average(only a 5+ regen), but then with red fury the extra attacks finish him off.
I dont doubt hes great for a cheap lord, but against any unit that can strike back they can and will break through and kill him, he may be cheap but its an extra 100pts for killing your general.
Ill admist that the trickstar's helm, talisman of preservation and great weapon is a combo that looks bad on paper, but really has to be played to apprcciete the strength off it, its one of those combos where (an experienced player) wont just throw heroes at a vamp hoping to kill him, they will attack him with ordinary troops first and learn what items he has, when they see T5, which wounds must be re rolled and a 4+ ward when hes striking with a great weapon first against 85-90% of lords, it may just make them think twice about facing him.
With that setup its not about killing power in numbers, its about such strength that he can take almost any foe down before they can strike, and if they do the best they can do against him is 1-2 wounds
And I also did a combat test against normal S3 troops, which turns out from 5 rounds of combat my vamp lord suffered 1 wound in the whole 5 rounds (9 hits at S3)
The ghoul king suffered a wound in every round except 1 lucky round where I passed all the regen saves, he also died in one round of combat
Next I tested great weapons against him assuming the enemy is in horde formation (9 attacks at strength 5)
Out of 5 rounds of 9 S5 hits (assuming its 4+ to hit and 4+ to wound, he can easily take 3-4 wounds and fail them on a 5+regen)
My vamp lord died in 1 of them, was wounded once in 1 of them and suffered no wounds in 3 rounds of combat
The ghoul king died in 2 of them, and was reduced to one wound in the others and thats just 1 round of combat with no buffs.
Maybe my brain doesnt work the same way as everyone who likes ghoul kings, and im not saying im against them in the sense of starting an argument over them, I just fail to see how they can survive at all.
With ghoul kings, if they dont kill everything around them, chances are they will die.
But a vampire lord with my setup can afford to fluff up a round of combat and he should still survive.
My win lose draw counter isnt great, but in each game my lord has never died while having this combo as most players dont bother trying to kill him once they see what he has and just concentrate on the unit.
Maybe im just crazy, but I cant field a 300pts +100pts lord with only a 5+ regeneraion save, it just seems recklass
Feel free to try and convince me, but I like to keep my general alive. I see that the ghoul king is cheaper and more offensive, but for the same points value a vampire lord can beat him, not easily but its more in his favour
Your kind of comparing apples to oranges, and saying oranges are better because they have a thicker skin there... nothing against your tests, but your taking a Ghoul king designed to kill Rank and File worth ~375pts and pitting it against a brick-wall of a Vampire Lord worth over 400pts.
Lets try another comparison, a fairly common Ghoulking build doing the rounds atm.:
Ghoulking
Ogreblade, Dragonbane Gem, OTS, Red Fury
This is ~370pts. Now, against your lord:
Ghoulking strikes first:
5 attacks, hitting on 4+ with re-rolls = 3.75 hits
3.75 hits, wounding on 2+ = 3.125 wounds
3.125 wounds, re-rolling successful wounds = 2.604 wounds
2.604 wounds, against a 4+ wardsave, re-rolling successful saves = 1.953 wounds
1.953 Red Fury Attacks, hitting on 4+ with re-rolls = 1.465 hits
1.465 hits, wounding on 2+ = 1.221 wounds
1.221 wounds, re-rolling successful wounds = 1.017 wounds
1.017 wounds, against a 4+ wardsave, re-rolling successful saves = 0.763 wounds
= on average 2.715 wounds
Lord strikes back:
5 attacks, hitting on 3+ = 3.333 hits
3.333 hits, wounding on 2+ = 2.777 wounds
2.777 wounds against a 5+ regen = 1.852 wounds
1.852 Red Fury Attacks, hitting on 3+ = 1.235 hits
1.235 hits, wounding on 2+ = 1.029 wounds
1.029 wounds, against a 5+ regen = 0.686 wounds
= on average 2.537 wounds
My usual Strigoi is this setup with Aura of Dark Majesty and Beguile, and/ or the cursed book so I'd rate him at a good chance to take on the defensive setup in a challenge.
Definately not saying your setup is bad, or that a strigoi is better, but it's a different setup and a different perspective.
As to dying to RnF, that shouldn't regularly happen without the enemy having Strength 6 and re-rolls to hit (hello swordmasters, Bestigor and Executioners), a decent amount of flaming attacks, or a copious amount of poison.
Lets try another comparison, a fairly common Ghoulking build doing the rounds atm.:
Ghoulking
Ogreblade, Dragonbane Gem, OTS, Red Fury
This is ~370pts. Now, against your lord:
Ghoulking strikes first:
5 attacks, hitting on 4+ with re-rolls = 3.75 hits
3.75 hits, wounding on 2+ = 3.125 wounds
3.125 wounds, re-rolling successful wounds = 2.604 wounds
2.604 wounds, against a 4+ wardsave, re-rolling successful saves = 1.953 wounds
1.953 Red Fury Attacks, hitting on 4+ with re-rolls = 1.465 hits
1.465 hits, wounding on 2+ = 1.221 wounds
1.221 wounds, re-rolling successful wounds = 1.017 wounds
1.017 wounds, against a 4+ wardsave, re-rolling successful saves = 0.763 wounds
= on average 2.715 wounds
Lord strikes back:
5 attacks, hitting on 3+ = 3.333 hits
3.333 hits, wounding on 2+ = 2.777 wounds
2.777 wounds against a 5+ regen = 1.852 wounds
1.852 Red Fury Attacks, hitting on 3+ = 1.235 hits
1.235 hits, wounding on 2+ = 1.029 wounds
1.029 wounds, against a 5+ regen = 0.686 wounds
= on average 2.537 wounds
My usual Strigoi is this setup with Aura of Dark Majesty and Beguile, and/ or the cursed book so I'd rate him at a good chance to take on the defensive setup in a challenge.
Definately not saying your setup is bad, or that a strigoi is better, but it's a different setup and a different perspective.
As to dying to RnF, that shouldn't regularly happen without the enemy having Strength 6 and re-rolls to hit (hello swordmasters, Bestigor and Executioners), a decent amount of flaming attacks, or a copious amount of poison.
Dreadgrass said:
Swordmasters a S5 . . . . White Lions on the other hand
I did not realise there was such overwhelming support for the King!
I will certainly give him a try as I have always been pro keeping the cost of characters down and some of these posts have certainly inspired me!
lost_shadow
Ghoul
I guess we will have to agree to disagree, I also did the test with
Ghoul king
Red fury
quickblood
Ogre blade
I didnt think of the other trickstar's shard though, I guess that would make a huge difference.
I agree that the ghoul king is far more offenesive and the vampire lord more defensive. Its just a point of which you prefer I suppose, I just dont like my lord being more vunrable to attack thats all. I would take a ghoul king in higher points games as a second combat lord to have a balance between defensive (my general) and offensive as a lord that wont cost me so much if hes slain.
Guess it just boils down to the luck of dice, they are fairly evenly matched against each other (more or less) so thanks for the statistics.
EDIT: interesting thing.......
I re did the lord vs lord fight with the items you said (including other trickstars shard.
Basically I did 6 rounds this time, my vamp won 3 rounds and so did the ghoul king, guess they are even then
It went one of 2 ways:
The ghoul king fails to kill the vamp lord in one round, then dies....
The ghoul king kills the vamp lord right out in the first set of attacks.....
Only 1 of my tests went to round 2, thats because I fluffed both sets of attacks for both lords, then the ghoul king won...
You know.......both our lords side by side could rule the world......nothing could stop them.....except a load of cannons loaded with cheese
Im also quite the fan of wraiths, but never seem to get a chance to use them in a list. Also, I exclusivly take a champion in whatever unit my lord is with, to avoid situations such as that, for at least 1 round of combat anyway.
Ghoul king
Red fury
quickblood
Ogre blade
I didnt think of the other trickstar's shard though, I guess that would make a huge difference.
I agree that the ghoul king is far more offenesive and the vampire lord more defensive. Its just a point of which you prefer I suppose, I just dont like my lord being more vunrable to attack thats all. I would take a ghoul king in higher points games as a second combat lord to have a balance between defensive (my general) and offensive as a lord that wont cost me so much if hes slain.
Guess it just boils down to the luck of dice, they are fairly evenly matched against each other (more or less) so thanks for the statistics.
EDIT: interesting thing.......
I re did the lord vs lord fight with the items you said (including other trickstars shard.
Basically I did 6 rounds this time, my vamp won 3 rounds and so did the ghoul king, guess they are even then
It went one of 2 ways:
The ghoul king fails to kill the vamp lord in one round, then dies....
The ghoul king kills the vamp lord right out in the first set of attacks.....
Only 1 of my tests went to round 2, thats because I fluffed both sets of attacks for both lords, then the ghoul king won...
You know.......both our lords side by side could rule the world......nothing could stop them.....except a load of cannons loaded with cheese
Im also quite the fan of wraiths, but never seem to get a chance to use them in a list. Also, I exclusivly take a champion in whatever unit my lord is with, to avoid situations such as that, for at least 1 round of combat anyway.
The only time I ever use a SGK is in Storm of magic, which I give him skabscrath, red fury, puzzlebox, dbg, aura and beguile and send him to town. I've got him to 10w before, and he is mean when he screams. Plus 10 s10 attacks with red fury mulches everything.
The problem with the sgk is that none of you seem to consider the opportunity cost. Mind you, all of this is a preference on how you want to play, and none are wrong which is why I feel we have the best 8th edition book
.
Take your sgk. You need a level 4 most games, and I never leave home without one. So, you add a master necro. The necro is probably not naked, some some gear is allocated to him. Where does the necro stay, for him all by his lonesome is a bad idea? So, you add a bunker. Cheapest we get is 20 zombies, you usually don't want them to engage anything because of their character. Your budget character is now as expensive as my usual combat hybrid character but I don't have a bunker (or I might, pending what im running that day).
Obviously, this is a preference issue. I think the lord is worth his weight in gold, but the sgk gas his uses, especially alongside a necro.
The problem with the sgk is that none of you seem to consider the opportunity cost. Mind you, all of this is a preference on how you want to play, and none are wrong which is why I feel we have the best 8th edition book
.Take your sgk. You need a level 4 most games, and I never leave home without one. So, you add a master necro. The necro is probably not naked, some some gear is allocated to him. Where does the necro stay, for him all by his lonesome is a bad idea? So, you add a bunker. Cheapest we get is 20 zombies, you usually don't want them to engage anything because of their character. Your budget character is now as expensive as my usual combat hybrid character but I don't have a bunker (or I might, pending what im running that day).
Obviously, this is a preference issue. I think the lord is worth his weight in gold, but the sgk gas his uses, especially alongside a necro.
Except my GK+MN has twice your wounds and sits in two different places and gives me two channels. Also there is no item I would ever give a MN besides MAYBE earthing rod
Cool, my lord/wight king combo will take your sgk to town. My vamp is just as good a caster, and the only three things that worry me playing other Vc are other combat lords (not as much), grave guard (killing blow)good and miscasts. Only one of those do I have no defense against.
Besides, i'll take ny ld 10 any day of the week, especially if I run a suicide death necro or if you are running death anywhere
Besides, i'll take ny ld 10 any day of the week, especially if I run a suicide death necro or if you are running death anywhere
And I wouldnt brag about how many wounds your almost naked characters have. My lord in swanky 3+/4++ is pretty tough to kill. Plus my combo that I mentioned is really tough to counter and something that I don't, or have not seen, run anywhere else.
I don't understand how you can't see the value of a ghoulking. I kit mine out to deal with RnF troops and to smash a combat in your favor single-handedly. Half of the time you can throw a ghoulking in the corner of a unit and only have to take 2 attacks from whatever you're fighting! I don't think he's as fragile as you all are assuming. Oh no, he took a wound! Rolls from the hunger and all of the spells you should be casting make him pretty invulnerable to dying (if you're smart about it). Put him in the corner of a unit and charge something stupid with it.
I see the value. That is not what I am arguing. I think the only trash thing in our book are 90% of the characters, and the blood knights (I hate them this edition).
What I am saying is don't pretend he is a budget character. He isn't. He fills the same-ish role the lord does but with a different flavor. I feel the lord is better for how I play, and more competitive for me to run. I like his style/lore better as well.
That said, I dont not like any of your said builds. I just like my alternatives better.
But seriously, play Som and give him skabs and the puzzlebox, plus aura and red fury and go to freaking town.
What I am saying is don't pretend he is a budget character. He isn't. He fills the same-ish role the lord does but with a different flavor. I feel the lord is better for how I play, and more competitive for me to run. I like his style/lore better as well.
That said, I dont not like any of your said builds. I just like my alternatives better
.But seriously, play Som and give him skabs and the puzzlebox, plus aura and red fury and go to freaking town.