Official Rumour Thread: New Vampire Counts Book

[hsnyder]

Hey guys.. wow i havent posted here in forever. Thanks to disciple of Nagash for sending out the heads up message about this release, I'm stoked about Warhammer again!

Hehe, anyways, I've noticed a bit of talk regarding bloodlines and how its all von carsteins. Actially, I think the bloodlines are "sorta" coming back. If all the rumors are true, you can totally build a themed army for any of the bloodlines, and can equip your vamps accordingly.

Blood Dragons? Well, you can have an all cavalry army! Dire wolves for core, load up on black knights and hexwraiths, then blood knights.

Strigoi? Well, you can have an all strigoi army! Ghoul King, Ghouly vamp, ghouls, crypt horrors, varghulf.

Carsteins? Skeletons, Zombies, Wolves, Bats, Black Coach

Lahmian? Coven Throne, Themed Vamp, Skeletons, Wights, etc

Necrarch? Lots of Skeletons and Zombies, corpse carts, spirit hosts, banshee, hexwraiths, mortis engine.

I really like that. The fact that a necro army is also possible is cool. So even if they're not really back, you can totally theme an army now. Before, you couldn't. You pretty much needed to take casty vamps, and there was virtually no reason not to use ghouls as your core choices.

 

[maxtoreador]

Want to see the bloodlines? Check the new Civil War rules in the same issue of WD as our "reveal" each bloodline has a Civil War Armies rule. If only we could claim the army & rule in the regular games. Lahmian? Oh all my vamps get Quickblood & Beguile for free and my handmaidens are stonger. Blood Dragon? I get a free unit of Blood Knights also 1/2 of my vamps have Master Strike and Dread Knight... also free.

 

[Sanai]

Yeah, the january WD is well worth having. Instead of rolling an appyling the rules to both armies, id just have each player select a rule from the list that suits their army.

 

[maxtoreador]

Yeah, the january WD is well worth having. Instead of rolling an appyling the rules to both armies, id just have each player select a rule from the list that suits their army.

Sorry, stated that a bit confusingly... but I was trying to say the same thought. Boosted magic, item stealing Nech's or +1S on half the bloody Carstein army would be nice... think the Strigoi got screwed though. Ghouls (Core and Special) get hated? pft.

 

[Sanai]

Hatred is really the only logical special rule to apply to the strigoi. The best ones to roll would have to be Animus Morti, Night of Ghosts or Sons of Abhorash.

 

[Veland]

Hello everyone,

I'm back to warhammer after a long time, and I can't wait to see my new armybook I expect to get on Monday.

I'm happy to see that supposedly we get new tactical options: all cavalry army, viable zombies and skeletons, and completely new units.

I'm still a bit afraid we'll get few unique magic items and powers, and that bloodlines might limit some vampire/army builds to some extent. I much preferred the limited list of common magic items and a wider list of army specific ones over the layout offered by 8th edition.

But it will turn out in just a couple of days, how the new dusk looks for our kind, and what delight it brings...

Have a nice slumber until then!

V.

 

[Sception]

Bloodlines in the new book are a fluff thing, not a game thing so much. A few things are specifically related to a particular bloodline (Von Carstein special characters, Strigoi Ghoul Kings, Blood Knights), and the coven throne is loosely associated with the Lahmian bloodline, but there's no army restrictions. You can include a ghoul King, a vampire on a Coven Throne, Konrad Von Carstein, and a unit of blood knights in the same army legally.

Options are there for themed armies if you want (although Necrarchs don't really have any specifically themed options for them), but choosing one bloodline is not a requirement as in the past.

 

[Uziel]

Blood Dragons? Well, you can have an all cavalry army! Dire wolves for core, load up on black knights and hexwraiths, then blood knights.

Welcome back to the hobby.

Technically, Dire Wolves are not Cavalry (Fast Cavalry) any longer, they are now Warbeasts. Yes, you can spend your entire Core allowance on wolves, but that's not really a fluffy Blood Dragon list in my mind, as Wolves are primarily a Von Carstein theme.

In general, there are some new options for making Bloodline themed armies, but you still have to make a lot of comprimises for many of them. Some of the new units do however seem to fit certain bloodlines much better than others, so it is definately easier to make a bloodline themed army than what it was in 7.ed, which was all Von Carstein with Blood Knight rent-a-knights included.

What I personally don't like is that there is no rule-enforced uniqueness to the vampires themselves, with the exception of the Ghoul-King that is. You are still free to make lets say a Blood Dragon "Cavalry" army, and have it led by Strigoi Ghoul-King (or other similar examples), and from experience, most players who have been around for a while will realize that these are the kind of things that you end up seeing when the gaming itself gets competitive and serious, possibly with some sub-par back story to the army which is supposed to "explain/justify" how this odd occurrence happened, but in most instances people don't even bother to to that.
This is what we saw in 7.ed, with the near exclusive Ghoul/Grave Guard armies, (of which there are as far as I know, no example of in any fluff), led by the ever present Red Fury/Infinite Hatred type Vampire Lords, and even though it is a bit early to tell yet, I really hope that half a year from know, there will still be some real diversity the VC armies/Vampire characters out there. *fingers crossed*

 

[Sanai]

It annoys me when people say that bloodlines were gone from the fluff, the fluff always mentioned the bloodlines.

 

[Uziel]

It annoys me when people say that bloodlines were gone from the fluff, the fluff always mentioned the bloodlines.

Untrue, or at least as far as the 7.ed VC book itself goes it is untrue. In the 7.ed book, there is absolutly no referenxe to the concept of seperate Vampire Bloodlines. Trust me, I've spendt a long time searching for just that in the book. The army book even stated right out that it was "a Sylvania" army at the start of the Beastiary section on p.33.
"On the following pages are a complete rules for the models in the Undead army of Sylvania".

All special character stories referred to in the "Infamous Vampires" section have had all traces of any "bloodline" removed from them as well.

The Blood Knights are not introduced to the game as Blood Dragons, rather sired by Walach of the Harkon "family", instead of ever mentioning them being Blood Dragons. I don't think the words Blood Dragon are even in the book.

I think many assumed they still existed, probably because GW didn't stop selling the old Bloodline Vampire models themselves and because some of the Vampiric Powers could be thought of as belonging to one particular Bloodline. One example is "Master of the Black Arts" which previously was a Necrarch Power, which made people think it still was, even though it was found on Mannfred himself, yet nobody thought that "odd". These kinds of things have confused players (including me until I started to go through the book with a fine-tooth comb looking for any trace of the Bloodlines), and it didn't help that they separated the vampiric powers themselves into six "fluff" categories, to keep more of the vampire "archetypes" either.

But, we've discussed this before, and you refused to listen then as well, so I imagine I'm wasting my time right now.

 

[Sanai]

Yes, it does talk about the various dynastic bloodlines. It doesnt call them bloodlines, but it talks about the various characters in those bloodlines. The 7th ed book didnt say "vampires dont have specific bloodlines anymore" it just didnt elaborate on what everyone already knew.

(some examples is all the talk about the von carsteins, where it talks about the lahmian sisterhood, where it talks about the line of wsoran, on the varghulf page it talks about the vampires of the strigoi, etc)

 

[Lynks]

It annoys me when people say that bloodlines were gone from the fluff, the fluff always mentioned the bloodlines.

Untrue, or at least as far as the 7.ed VC book itself goes it is untrue. In the 7.ed book, there is absolutly no referenxe to the concept of seperate Vampire Bloodlines.

Page 27 "the black prince" beginning of paragraph 2. builds up on traits of that line

Page 25,26 27. It discusses the ENTIRE line of W'soran and mentions that they became the necrarchs and specifically states that they are not von carsteins. builds up on the traits of that line.

Page 28. "THe queen of mysteries" Talks about how Neferata created all vampires and how she leads the lahmian vampires. Talks about lahmian traits.

The only ones who don't get their name dropped is the blood dragons, however there is still a note in the timeline on page 30 about Abhorash and Walach Harkon at least.

In all your searching of the book you obviously didn't try very hard when I literally saw some these on the first page I opened to.

 

[Sanai]

Then theres the fact that half the units belong to specific bloodlines- for bloodlines to have been removed from the book, they would have had to remove ghouls, varghulfs, blood knights, dire wolves, fell bats... the drakenhoff standard, the royal standard of strigos, all of the special characters, the carstein ring, the banner of blood keep....

 

[Uziel]

Yes, it does talk about the various dynastic bloodlines. It doesnt call them bloodlines, but it talks about the various characters in those bloodlines. The 7th ed book didnt say "vampires dont have specific bloodlines anymore" it just didnt elaborate on what everyone already knew.

SOME of what used to be the names of bloodlines previous are mentioned, but not in that context. I think the word Lahmia is mentioned once in Neferata's description, and I think either Necrarch or Strigoi was mentioned once as well in the "Infamous Vampires" section, but none of these were ever mentioned in the context of Bloodlines, nor are the existence of seperate Bloodlines ever mentioned in the book. The Blood Dragons are never mentioned either, which would be very odd it the concept of Bloodlines still existed, and the "Walach of the Harkon family" would be a bit of an unnecessary re-write, not to mention that it would be very odd that they had gone to such lengths to remove all previous material that supported the ideas of the various Bloodlines. It would have been much easier to just keep it the way it was before after all.
I do suspect since it was a Sylvania army, and they wanted to include as many units and vampiric powers as possible, they made these compromises.

Sure, you can always assume that this was still the case, but that's not a fact supported by the book itself. You can always read into things what you like, but it doesn't change the facts in this case.
However, to add to the confusion, GW has allowed authors of various vampire books to use the Bloodline consept side by side with the 7.ed army book, which haven't made things any better, so the fact that people seem to have missed how strong a "Sylvania" angle the 7.ed book truly had.

Come to think of it, I don't think anything is ever mentioned in the Red Duke book of him being a Blood Dragon (even though he is offcourse), so I don't know if that author has his restrictions at that time... Maybe I am wrong in this case, but I just can't recall this being the case at the moment. Maybe someone else can recall whether this is the case or not.

In any case, I look forward to see if any "developments" have been made in the Bloodline fluff-department with the new book, as things have been at somewhat of a stand-still for very long time as regards to this.

 

[Uziel]

Page 27 "the black prince" beginning of paragraph 2. builds up on traits of that line

Page 25,26 27. It discusses the ENTIRE line of W'soran and mentions that they became the necrarchs and specifically states that they are not von carsteins. builds up on the traits of that line.

Page 28. "THe queen of mysteries" Talks about how Neferata created all vampires and how she leads the lahmian vampires. Talks about lahmian traits.

The only ones who don't get their name dropped is the blood dragons, however there is still a note in the timeline on page 30 about Abhorash and Walach Harkon at least.

In all your searching of the book you obviously didn't try very hard when I literally saw some these on the first page I opened to.

These examples are all from the "Infamous Vampire" section I spoke off above, which may very well represent "other kinds" of vampires throughout history etc. It is just enough to hint at, or allow you to hint at the existence of different vampires, based on bloodlines, and not other affiliations etc, not Bloodlines as we used to know them. In fact, with no previous knowledge of the Blood Dragons, you wouldn't even know about the concept of the Blood Dragons based on the 7.ed book. You might have been wondering who these Harkons in the timeline were though...

Not saying that the existence of the Bloodlines are not hinted at in some fashion Sanai, but that based on the 7.ed book, they are not definite in any way and that the army itself is a Sylvania army book.

 

[Uziel]

Then theres the fact that half the units belong to specific bloodlines- for bloodlines to have been removed from the book, they would have had to remove ghouls, varghulfs, blood knights, dire wolves, fell bats... the drakenhoff standard, the royal standard of strigos, all of the special characters, the carstein ring, the banner of blood keep....

Half the units belonging to specific bloodlines??

1. Ghouls are not one specific to one bloodline, even though they prefer to hang out with the strigoi given the option.

2. Dire Wolves are not specific to the Von Carsteins, in fact even Sibbichai (Necrarch) makes use of them. They are however more strongly tied to them than any other, probably because they have a whole province from which to let them roam, and because Von Carsteins typically can transform into wolves and follow them themselves.

3. A Varghulf could technically be any Vampire that lost control of the beast within..

4. Fell Bats specific. I wouldn't even know whom you think they would be specific to to be honest...

5. Blood Knights are in the Book mercenaries, that hail from the "Harkon family".

6. All these items can very well exist without the existence of unique Bloodlines itself, and I've never disputed that the Von Carsteins are in the book in any case..

 

[Sception]

Ghouls are also specifically mentioned in relation to Von Carsteins as degenerate Sylvanian peasantry. Their models have become more monstrous since then, but that's still their fluff, as far as I know.

 

[Mad 'At]

I agree with Uziel. If someone completely new to warhammer would pick up the 7th edition of VC he (or she) would have a clue about bloodlines. It is no longer part of the vampire count concept even though GW has never said it out loud, but that is natural. When a new edition of a book is released everything from previous editions is scratched. GW did not announce it when they scratched every mention of The Storm of Chaos when 8th arrived, but if you look closely in the new books, you'll see it has not yet happened. Only what is written in the newest book actually matters, though as always you are free to come up with your own fluf, and take inspiration from older editions.

 

[Uziel]

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that GW eliminated the other bloodlines, just that then did so from an arme perspective, i.e what you could play. The sylvania angle is there in black and white at the very start of the non-fluff part of the book. Another strong indication of this is that ALL the von carstein special characters in the 7.ed book have vampiric powers tatt previously belonged to one of the other bloodlines. The bloodline purity was removed to accomodate a more varied von carstein.

I'm pretty exited to see what they've done with the fluff-part this time I must admit. With some luck, I'll have the book tomorrow or monday.

 

[Sception]

Blood lines seem to be a bigger part of the fluff now, and more options in the book are specifically linked to them. Strigoi Ghoul kings are a godsend to fans of that bloodline, as regular vampire rules don't represent them too well - I just wish there was a hero level version! But they don't lock you into a specific bloodline like the older books, which I personally am thankful for.

 

[Uziel]

The strigoi always stood out a bit, so yes, the Ghoul King is a nice option this time around. Petty that they did not include the hero option, but they must make some hard decisions based on the 96 page format I presume.
I would't like the same bloodline format as 6.ed either, but I don't like the idea of a mixed bloodline army on the battlefield, and I would personally like to see some Unique bloodline strenghts and weaknesses, as that would bring a stronger and more varied theme to the gaming tables in the long run.
That bring said, I'm pretty optimistic tatt the 8ed book will be far better then the 7ed one in any case.

 

[Sception]

Of course, there's not too much difference between a strigoi and a regular vamp lord - +poison, +regen, -ability to wear armor. That really could have been a bloodline trait, imo. I suppose Ghoul Kings can ride terrorgheists and other vamp lords can't, but I see no reason why that would be the case - the 'gheist is a big necromantic monstrosity, well fitting necrarchs, and is created from the titanic bats that haunt the sylvanian forests, well fitting Von Carstiens. Anyway, whatev's, I'm glad it's an option at all.

 

[Necromancer]

I'm more annoyed they've pulled the old bloodline models. All gone now.

Also the mixed bloodline idea seems to be the current "thing" at least judging by the so far excellent(opinion)Ulrika series. They actually go into bloodlines a fair bit.

 

[Von Calyptra]

I'm more annoyed they've pulled the old bloodline models. All gone now.

What!? Dammit! If I'd known they were going to do that I'd have bought a bunch of them. If you want to field a Blood Dragon now, I guess you either have to hit ebay or else drop $60 on the zombie dragon/terrorgheist kit.

 

[Count Darvaleth]

Of course, there's not too much difference between a strigoi and a regular vamp lord - +poison, +regen, -ability to wear armor. That really could have been a bloodline trait, imo. I suppose Ghoul Kings can ride terrorgheists and other vamp lords can't, but I see no reason why that would be the case - the 'gheist is a big necromantic monstrosity, well fitting necrarchs, and is created from the titanic bats that haunt the sylvanian forests, well fitting Von Carstiens. Anyway, whatev's, I'm glad it's an option at all.

Ghoul King has Initiative 8, one higher than Vampire Lord. But otherwise as you've stated.