Those are all valid enough points, keep the units as they are.
Your talk about Khalida gave me an idea though! Tomb Guards should definitely have the Spirit Hosts bodyguard ability!
By the way, Tyler Mengel actually posted on this forum some while back. Don’t think he is currently around though.
A bodyguard option would certainly be nice to have. Traditionally though that's something the tomb herald does. In the Legends rules though the tomb herald isn't a very good bodyguard due to not really being much cheaper per wound than the heroes he'd be guarding for, which is down to his big dramatic banner effect - an effect that requires him to sit still which means either the character he's guarding also has to sit still or he isn't even doing that at all. While a herald can be both things - a bodyguard and a battle standard - he can't do both things well, and really should pick one thing to be his primary gimmick. Something we'll need to discuss I guess.
regardless, tomb guard are questionable bodyguards due to being pretty elite, and are already doing an awful lot, imo they'd need to strip out much of their current stuff to make room for that. I don't know. what are saurus temple guard looking like these days? something to consider down the line.
1. Yes I think so.
2. Yes, but it is a bit repetitive. Given that this is only phase one I think it is fine. However, I can feel that I'm already thinking of phase 2 personally as that is what I'm excited about
.
3. I have no strong opinions on Settra.
4. I like your revamp of Khalida.
5. Skeleton Legionaires will always have a place in the faction if for no other reason then being dirt cheap battleline. I would prefer however that they had the +1 attack if they didn't charge as the +1 to save doesnt make them much more survivable. And the idea that these slow methodical dead legions fight better when they get charges is cool fluff and an interesting mechanic.
6. I think it is too early to start doing balance like that. Keep the original banners and lets tone them down when the rest is done if they look to good. However, I also thinknwe should be wary of toning good things down as we will end up with a boring book if we do that.
7. Haven't read it.
8. I don't think we should start "removing" units from an already limited model range. However, I like the idea that this army has some unique Invocations as part of their faction rules. I agree that all of them being deep strikers are a bit redundant but let us address that in the next phase.
9. I like that idea a lot!
2 - phase 2 is more exciting, but also has a lot more going against it. It's less likely to come together in the first place due to being more difficult, and to it being harder to get people to agree on an idea once we're making them up whole cloth rather than updating what's there. Even if we do get a single vision together, the more we stray from 'official' games workshop rules the less likely others are to be interested in playing with or against them. I'm also excited for phase 2, I have some ideas that I think will work really well (including making some units invocations, & the casket faction terrain), but that don't fit into the scope of phase 1, but for now I think the focus really has to be getting something together that looks and feels like the legends rules, just playable in the modern game.
4 - including the way I handled here attacks? I thought that was pretty cool, but it seems to be getting a lot of pushback. If I'm just wrong I'm just wrong. :p
5 - I'm pretty convinced on switching to +1 attack instead of save. It seems to be a much more typical battleline infantry thing.
6 - Ah! My own first principles, thrown back in my face! You are quite right of course. I will revert the unit banners for now, BUT they will be under strict scrutiny, and I don't think we need to wait for phase 2 if the current versions prove problematic, as imo 'heal x wounds or restore up to x wounds worth of models' is already just updating how this sort of design works to 3e.
8/9 - The Tomb Kings model range isn't actually very limited at all by AoS standards, even if we 'remove' 4 units to make them into invocations/endless spells and terrain. I think there are a bit too many deep striking harasser units as is (Apophas, Scorpion, Stalkers, Carrion, Tomb Swarms), and imo they're likely to get in each others way competing for the same points and role in your army. Making some of them invocations could make players more likely to run them - together or otherwise - thus adding to the army's effective range. Again, though, this is very much a phase 2 thing.
I like what you've done!
For Khalida I would agree that multiple attacks with the change of doing mortal wounds on 6s is more in line with what normally happens. You could make it so she does D3 damage and does her damage characteristics worth of mortal wounds. But, no one really gets only 1 attack anymore, even squishy wizards.
OK, I'm going to try one more time to defend the current version of Khalida.
a) she's a special character, she's allowed to be special
b) It doesn't make any sense to me to have a strike last poison that takes effect even if she doens't injure the target
c) dealing D3 mortals on a 2+ instead of attacking normally never does 'too much' damage for Khalida's character concept, but also is very unlikely, though still possible to fail altogether. This is highly desireable! We want big bad enemy characters to be afraid of engaging khalida for fear of the strike last effect, but if they're forced to, I don't think it should be a sure thing.
d) If we give her a regular number of attacks, then she can't do mortals+strike last on every hit or she starts doing damage way above her character concept
e) if we instead give her a more normal profile and trigger strike last on actually doing damage then the chance of triggering the ability at all goes way way down *especially* on strong enemies who tend to have good saves and wards and other defensive abilities like hit or wound penalties.
f) if we instead give her mortals and trigger the ability on 6s to wound, or even to hit, then we avoid the issue of enemy hero defenses, but the chance of triggering the ability at all is still way, way down across the board. Even if we give her 5 attacks (rend and damage of which would need to be pretty low to not overtune her damage output), and 5 feels like a lot for a mummy but maybe not too much for khalida specifically, but yeah even with 5 attacks there's still a 40% chance of rolling exactly zero sixes to hit, to say nothing if we make it a 6 to wound like most other 'on a six' mortal effects. If I'm playing opposite khalida that's somewhat concerning, but maybe not the fear I was looking for her to inspire.
g) but again, and maybe I'm wrong here, but I don't think the ability should be automatic just for /targeting/ an enemy. I think there needs to be at least /some/ chance for it to fail, which again is preserved if we're looking at a single 2+ roll.
h) we could divorce the ability from her attacks altogether, but that feels less cool to me
i) I kind of like her ranged and melee being the same since it's the same weapon, but that's a minor issue easily set aside since the ranged attack is the serpent staff spitting poison and the melee attack is it biting people.
So there, that's my big push for Neferata as she is in the current draft. THAT SAID, multiple people have pushed back hard, so I will be writing out an alternative version with a more normal stat line to at the very least play test to see which feels right.
..
Calling back a previous comment in this thread - khalida, by virtue of being a complete rewrite since the previous version just didn't fit with how we've re-written other mummy heroes, is a preview of the difficulty finding consensus will present for each new warscroll and rule once we actually get to phase 2.
For Settra I might change the crown to be that if he does a command ability roll a die on a 3+ it does not use a command point or something. That would essentially give more on his arm the ability to do commands by not using up points when he does them but is terminology that already exists.
The issue with making the crown just improve CP efficiency (if we're going that route I'd personally just have it add +1 CP each battle round, sort of like Archaon's ability) is that you then kind of don't need or want extra tomb kings, as any command ability stuff settra isn't personally doing could be just as easily handled by unit champs, and even if we gave them all different command abilities again they still can't stack them on the same unit. The legends version of the crown - back in first edition when it still worked as intended - specifically encouraged you to run other kings under settra's command, which effectively conveyed settra's /entire deal/ in the narrative - he was the king who conquered all the rival city states, making their kings into his vassals and uniting their lands to create Nehekhara in the first place. After nagash's ritual and death, when the tomb kings fell to war with each other, settra was once again the one who conquered them all, made them his vassals, uniting the now undead lands of nehekhara and imposing the order that would define its unliving civilization going forward. Settra is a king-over-other-kings, and the legends crown reflected that, and I'd at least want our fixed version of it to try to reflect that still.
If it makes you feel any better, heroes copying their general's command abilities when used at no additional CP cost and in defiance of the usual 'once per phase per ability' restriction IS already a thing in 3rd edition, and from a 3rd edition battletome no less. Check out Dreadblade Harrows in the new Nighthaunt battletome.
2) It works well, I think it is good as is.
6) It is okay, but maybe returning a 5 wound unit is a bit strong
6) this is my concern, yeah. I will be reverting the chariots & necroknights for now, or at least setting out competing versions of their warscrolls to test out in comparison to each other, per my reply to Sun King above, but once we get a complete usable draft of all the warscrolls together examining these revival banners on 5 wound units will be one of the first major questions to investigate.
I'm still salty I never bought the Necrosphinx, even if just for a display piece - I always told myself I would. One of my favourite models in the hobby.
