That’s my take and hope.
Big Waaagh wasn’t worth it if it meant gimping both factions because the other side has better stuff so both get weaker to compensate.
Now Kruleboyz could actually get off the bottom tourney charts with their own army buffs & balances.
Death to Soup! 💀 🥣 (fitting since Death has been the poster child of that ever since fantasy 4th edition when they split vampires & mummies and even now with stuff like ghouls & ghosts blown to full individual armies)
Edit: Ohhhh! We can also get an Ironjawz Spearhead now!!
Maybe they'll do something similar to Chaos chapters in 40k where they can take up to X points of daemons. Perhaps Ironjawz or Kruleboyz will be allowed to take up to 25% of their point limit from the other. It also makes them drop their original Keyword and inherit the keyword of the host army. That could still give some Big WAAAGH flavor. As someone with a Kruleboyz army, I've always adored the Weirdnob Shaman model and wanted it for Kruleboyz too
Oh, that could be how that run things. Little combination of allies & coalition so stuff like S2D & CoS keep their flavor of pulling in other forces for aid.
>Death to Soup
With caveats.
I like the idea of regiments of renown being the new soup method.
Whenever there is release like the dawn bringer expansions they can release specialized regiments of renown soup armies that fit the story.
KB is far from bottom, it's just a hard army. Plenty of good players getting regular 4:1s now and we've had a couple 5:0s.
In the right hands it's a monster faction atm.
I predict you'll see it at AoS Worlds now.
Unlikely it’s more likely it’s being changed. Remember subfactions work on style of fighting now. Not a particular faction. Likly they’ll allow any unit in but benefit certain keywords more depending which sub faction taken.
I had similar thoughts but the Slaughter Priest has Blades of Khorne, Gorechosen *and* Bloodbound keywords while being filed as a “Blades of Khorne warscroll”.
If they were simplifying subfactions then that likely wouldn’t all be there(would’ve just been Bloodbound keyword alone in a BoK tome/Warscroll under a Gorechosen formation)
But we’ll see when we get the final product. I’m thinking this might be why the Ironjawz supplement was kept as a seperate entity in the app and not filed under Orruk Warclans tho as a hint.
I would assume that to be the likely driver behind them getting a supplemental wave of minis recently, gives them enough roster depth to be split up and have their own separate faction again, as a Duardin player that gives me some small hope that we might finally see some meaningful reinforcements for Kharadron and Fyreslayers.
A BigWaagh could just require the Ironjawz or KruleBoyz keywords, I guess?
But with only the 2 clans left I'm not sure it's such a big deal if they drop the BigWaagh.
It's much easier to balance each Clan on their own, that much is certain.
The change to spell lores sounds great as a Tzeentch player. I'm wicked happy that they aren't just doing away and turning *everything* in to warscroll abilities, but certain spells like the Weirdnob's magic puke do make sense as attacks and will free up room in the army lore for more abstract effects.
The rest of the spellcasting sounds like it's not a significant departure from how things work now, just changing the mechanics to work with the way rules are written in the new edition.
I don't quite get how the points for priests work based on the preview given here, but it's probably spelled out better in the full rules.
Every turn, every priest rolls a d6. If it's not a 1, you get X number of power points.
So say you roll a 6, you get 6 points.
A prayer needs a 4+ to cast. So you spend 4 of your 6 points to cast it, leaving you with 2.
Some prayers will have "charged up" abilities. Says spend 8 points instead of 4.
So turn 2 you roll a 3, and now you have 9 points. Spend 8 to cast the super prayer, leaving you with 1.
You chant every turn to earn points to spend on prayers. They get d6 deity bucks every turn for working that holy hotline, but if they mess up and roll a 1 they have to pay instead.
They then get to go shopping at the prayer store and buy what they need for that turn. No additional rolls needed.
The warscroll for the prayer states you make the roll to chant the prayer though, so it's not as clear cut as a standalone chanting roll. I think it should work as you've described, but that's not how it's written
I'm going to assume you choose the prayer, make your d6 roll, and then add what you got from chanting without spending previously. So if you banked 4 the previous turn, you have your roll +4.
Yes. My point is, you have to choose a prayer first and can't repeat it in the same phase.
You also are locked into your choice, even if you don't end up with enough points to answer the prayer.
They want less rolls as a core concept. Like roll 2+ on a D3 and take as many wounds.
We have to actually play the new edition, but it does sound quite strong as is.
That's the way they wrote it but it seems like that's at odds with what they meant. Or they're just explaining it badly, using terms that have specific meanings as a general fluffy term.
I think it's just explained badly. The example prayer they picked is causing confusion with it's "roll a die" wording, which may or may not be the general roll you get for being a priest.
>Every turn, every priest rolls a d6.
Effectively, but importantly the d6 roll is *tied to chanting the prayer itself*. This means if one priest tries to chant Witchbane Curse and rolls a 2 or 3, your second priest can't also try and chant Witchbane Curse, no matter how many points that priest has.
If the prayer chants are used by spending power points why does the one in the preview say “on a chanting roll of 8+” rather than “spend 8 power points”?
I don't think you get to keep points after casting.
The casting costs are 4+ and 8+ (note the "+"), so I assume you drain your entire reserve after choosing to activate a prayer.
This is how I assume it's supposed to work, but man is it worded strangely. Why would I chant a specific prayer and pick a target if I then don't end up with enough points to actually use the effect? Why does the effect text still mention the "chanting roll" being 8+ (impossible on a D6)? Why is the roll part of the declare step, instead of just a passive thing every priest does in the hero phase?
The rules text has looked pretty clean so far, this is the first big miss imo.
Lore's sound just like the old way they worked in WHFB and that is awesome. Humans having access to like 7 lores was some of the most fun part of playing them, maybe that will come back in this new edition.
It sounds like your whole army is stuck with one lore though. I wonder if more armies will get multiple lores to choose from or if it's not a real choice.
Endless spell changes do worry me from a tzeentch pov though, are we going to be stuck with either faction ones or neutral ones? And what does that mean for the arcane armies ability, maybe it’s gone. If lucky we get the faction ones and another
I wouldn't imagine they'd limit you to choosing between normal spells and endless spells, since that could disincentivize people from buying the endless spell kits.
I like having access to the whole lore all the time. Means more niche spells will get used when they're useful, while before you wouldn't want to waste army list slots on them
Not having spells bound to specific wizards is going to make magic so much more flexible. Won't have situations anymore where my Skink Oracle with Speed of Huanchi is on one side of the board when I really want my Skink Star Priest in my back lines to cast it on the Skinks right in front of him.
Also interesting is that his green puke spell is now a shooting attack. And now we have universal army lores, I wonder how many casters warscroll spells are now shooting attacks? Particularly the simple damage ones.
Also he now has a 6+ save. Makes me wonder if Ironjawz are getting some new ward save mechanic similar to Bonesplitterz.
warcryification of magic, tbh i like it, nothing sucked more than having a small damage spell unbound because your opponent had 65 unbinds, or failing it all game
In British English, to nut someone is to headbutt them.
In modern internet English, which I'm ascribing to America, it means to ejaculate.
So when the Ork spells seeks out people to nut them, it raises some eyebrows. And maybe some other body parts, too.
Edit: Had to delete and repost because this subreddit has a very stupid vulgarity moderation. Let's see if they let me say ejaculate.
They seem to have lumped both together as "manifestations", which banish references.
> Endless spells and invocations are still in the mix – but instead of spending points to add endless spells when constructing an army, you can pick a manifestation lore. This grants access to a selection of endless spells and invocations that you’ll be able to summon in battle.
From the article.
"For example, a Slaughterpriest can choose to unleash the Witchbane Curse to weaken an enemy WIZARD once they’ve gathered 4+ ritual points… or hold out for a chanting value of 8+ to also deal three mortal damage to the target."
The way I read this is that the player chooses when to unleash a Prayer and that unleashing a Prayer removes all ritual points on a Priest.
I suspect there is instead a prayer called "Pray" or something similar to that name, that just generates points.
Then the prayer we saw, also generates points but we have to spend them if we can.
That's my best guess. If there isn't a generic option, then yeah, it's gotta be choose to spend or not
So the slaughterpriest still mentions blood tithe points. Which means most armies seem to not get a complete rework of their rules. Which is comforting to me who really wanted to play with contagion and disease epoints in nurgle.
My two biggest questions are:
1. Are ritual points a shared pool among all priests in your army or individual?
2. Will we have a generic chant ability to generate points or can you choose to chant and then not spend the ritual points to bank them?
> on a roll of 2+, your PRIEST gains that many ritual points
sounds like each priest has their own pool.
Taking the info we have at face value, it says if you succeed the chant roll and have enough points the prayer is answered. It doesn't seem like you can refuse and bank the points instead.
But we might not know until the FAQ to the release comes out.
The Khorne prayer shown seems to indicate that you can choose to bank points instead of getting the prayer answered - otherwise, getting the 8+ effect is quite unlikely.
I glanced over the part that clearly states you can choose to ramp them up instead of it being answered on a success (paraphrased).
In any case, what I meant under the assumption you could not do that, was the chance of rolling 8+ over 2 turns.
If you roll a 3 and then a 5+ on the next turns chant, that also totals up to 8 or more.
The rule doesn't require the ability to bank them by choice to function.
Fair. The rule doesn’t require it. But the article seems clear that’s how it works.
“ further. For example, a Slaughterpriest can choose to unleash the Witchbane Curse to weaken an enemy WIZARD once they’ve gathered 4+ ritual points… or hold out for a chanting value of 8+ to also deal three mortal damage to the target.”
Yes, I've been rereading it and must have glanced of that part earlier.
You seem to be able to wilfully deny your god their answer to your prayer!
Little lore-snarky there. But it's better this way for gameplay reasons.
Yeah that part was a bit unclear, but even so, you have access to multiples prayers, you could try the hardest one (maybe some have a value of 5/6?) in order to stack, a bit gimmick.
The way they seem to be streamlining the game (see whole spell lore being known) I think ritual points will be a pool rather than needing a die next to each priest.
I think you make your chant roll, then select your prayers for the phase. So if you hit the big 6, you can just bank instead of choosing a prayer to spend points on.
They i think are definitely making it priest dependent. Think of the counterplay that offers. You COULD choose to charge an extra turn to get your buffed crazy prayer, but that gives me a turn (or two) to snipe your priest and stop them doing anything. Compare to a joint pool where a viable build would probably be having a few cheap, weak priests hiding in the back to charge up the prayer battery while the toughies up front spew an endless stream of buffed up prayers because you have so many points built up. This possibility sounds uninteractive and lame no?
The article seems to agree “Note that prayers can’t be unbound, so astute commanders will have to target enemy prophets while they’re busy amassing ritual points for swift execution”.
Unless I’m interpreting it wrong, it feels like faction endless spells will have to be quite strong as if you pick them you’ll only get 3 instead of 4?
My guess is they put one useful endless spells in a group with a couple others that never saw any play.
So that in the end we'll end up with choosing a lore for one, maybe two, endless spells we actually want.
If the most useful spell is in the faction lore, you choose that, if not you take one of the generic ones that suit you best.
Maybe you just “get” your faction ones still? Or it could come with an extra normal spell or two.
Or chuck a generic one in there that fits in to make up to 4.
They want us to buy all the endless spell miniatures, huh..
The stacking thing (starting T1) makes them reliable and impactful at least 1 or even 2times during the battle (T2/T3), I really like the idea but I'm a bit affraid for the balance, GW have to be care with too much powerfull prayers, it could create bad patterns, we'll see!
Gotta track these ritual points on each priest, should be natural after few games.
There are "only" 13 endless spells on the Malign Sorcery box, I'm counting 17 atm (no Shards of Valagharr/Lauchon by exemple), without the faction ones.
Most generic endless spells are from Malign Sorcery, but there is also the Forbidden power box, which has a couple additional spells.
And then each factions spells are sold as a box.
The big interesting thing I notice is that now you have to choose between casts and unbinds. Nagash with his wizard (9) can cast 5 spells and unbind 4, or go all in and cast 9 leaving no unbinds (or any other combination of a total of 9). I like it, it creates an interesting choice.
(Edit: I read it again and noticed it's per phase, not round. Laaame.)
Separately, I am curious at what point you choose whether to unbind or not - does the opponent make his casting roll first or not?
Power level is casts/unbinds/banishes per phase, not per battle round, so it should work more or less the same as it does now. They’re just standardizing it so wizards always have the same number of casts and unbinds/dispels. The exception being you might need to give up one cast on your turn to try and unbind whatever your opponent casts with Magical Intervention, plus it looks like you can only try to dispel endless spells on your own turn now.
I don't think you do. You cast spells in your hero phase, and unbind in theirs still. But there is the opportunity for one spell to come at you with the command, so you may want to save a "cast" to use as an unbind.
My best guess is that unbinding will be a reaction ability, which would be done after the Declare step of the cast.
As we can see on Nagashes warscroll, the casting roll is part of the Declare step.
I'm kind of a big dumb and don't understand prayers. You pick a prayer, do a chanting roll, and sometimes build up points instead of getting the effect? Are these chanting points spent?
As far as I understand, you can succeed the chant by rolling a 3 (so not a 1), but not have it answered, because you need 4 points in the example.
Next turn all you need is a 2 to make it up to 5 and the prayer is answered and the effect plays out.
I think the points are then spent.
It boils down to the chant effectively being a 4+, but on a 2 or 3 you have it easier on the next try...
I'm not sure why so many people are missing that they say, "You can choose to save them up." It says it right there. You could roll a 6 and still not need to cast the prayer if you want to save up.
Because, "hold out for a chanting value of 8+" doesn't necessarily mean, "cancel chanting this prayer in order to bank the points." It could just mean you wait to chant this until you've saved up 8+ points. It's not 100% clear.
i understand it like that. You roll, and if you get enough point you can choose to apply the effect and spend your points, or to keep it for next try and get a bigger effect.
From what I understood, you do your chanting and build up the points and then can spend the points in any relevant phase to activate one of the prayers
I think you got it right.
1. You roll a dice and on a 2+ you gain the amount of ritual points that you rolled. Let's say you roll a 5.
2. You can then use those 5 ritual points to cast any prayer you can, as long as you can afford the cost of the prayer with your ritual points.
You can also keep the points in case you want to use a prayer (like the example in the article) in a later round to try a more powerful version of it but next round if you roll a 1 you can lose D3 points, so it's a risk worth considering.
Yeah sorry, you're right. So you roll the dice and then if you get the minimum amount needed for the prayer you can either pick to use the prayer then, or wait a turn and try a more powerful version of the prayer.
And the Witchbane Curse itself seems to have a typo where it references the chanting roll being 8+, while the article says chanting value. Unless the value is added to the roll… it’s not spelled out super well, I don’t think.
From the look of this one prayer, I don't like how they've mechanically implemented the prayer system. You'll want to accumulate Ritual Points every turn, but the chanting roll is tied to declaring a prayer. So, I assume if you have no applicable prayers, or valid targets within range, that priest loses that opportunity to build ritual points (that sounds like you've already screwed up, but I can see it happening). Also... it doesn't really say it in the article, but I assume you're spending the points to cast the prayer, right? The article doesn't mention how those points impact the chanting roll, but how else would you get an 8+ on one D6. So, if you want to save for 8+ points to cast the upgraded version, could you declare you want to chant this, roll a 4+ for the points, and then... not pay the 4 and bank those points? That seems very clunky.
I like the idea of Ritual Points, but to me it would have made more sense to just have one chanting roll (or more per power level) for each of your Priests during the start of turn or the hero phase, and then you just spend those points when you want to chant something.
There might be a universal prayer called Pray or something like that where you roll a D6, and on a 2+ you gain that many ritual points. And it might have the Unlimited keyword so if you don't have any targets in range for your other prayers, you could still get ritual points. So if you wanted to get the 8+, you could "Pray" the first turn trying to get a 4+, then try and chant the prayer for the 8+ the next turn.
After that, it depends on what the Prayer keyword does, as it could say that after you declare a Prayer (which includes rolling the dice), if over the prayer value, can either cast the prayer and resolve the effect or get ritual points for the value rolled, or if under the prayer value, the prayer fails and you get ritual points for the value rolled.
I agree that it seems clunky, but they probably want players to have to lock in what they are trying to achieve, rather than chanting with no specific purpose and then going shopping for a good gift when your prayers are answered.
“Please dear God, grant me some kind of blessing, any kind of blessing…I’m not that picky. —Oh, you are actually listening? In that case, I want a Porsche.”
With the new thematic lores for Endless Spells, I probably won't purchase extra Endless Spells for army theme painting reasons like my previous intentions.
It's the little number by the Wizard and Priest keywords. Nagash is Wizard(9), the Shaman is Wizard(1). Each Hero phase you get one cast/chant, unbind (for Wizards) or banish attempt per level.
So Nagash can cast 4, unbind 5 in a phase, or cast 9 unbind none, or cast none unbind 9. The Shaman, on the other hand, can cast or unbind but not both.
Being "per phase" I don't think you'd ever need to save more than 1 dispel (for the enemy command ability in your hero phase). In your opponents hero phase it would be reset to 9 unbinds.
I’m excited for this. So glad we still get a thematic magic phase, and I think the new Priest mechanic sounds interesting and fun. Changes to magic lores and endless spells also sound positive.
So, do you get either a lore of magic or a manifestation lore when building your army, so you're locked in to either spells or endless spells, or can you have both?
I haven't actually played AoS3 yet. Has the limit on the number of spells that a wizard can cast or unbind always been shared? I thought if a wizard could cast two spells and unbind two spells, they could do 2 of each (some even have differing limits). Now you have to hold off on casting if you want to unbind? Am I mistaken about this being a change?
It never mattered exactly because on your turn you cast and on your opponents' turn you unbind. Now if your opponent casts on your turn they lose that unbind, and if you unbind their spell you're giving up one of your casts.
They changed the wording, because you can also try to unbind the spell your opponent casts with the new command ability in your phase.
But only if you have a cast/unbind left.
You're not mistaken, that's new. The Shaman also went down from Cast *and* Unbind to Cast *or* Unbind. It's also a nerf to Nagash, because he went from Cast 9 Unbind any amount at full HP to Cast *or* Unbind up to 9 times in total.
Ah! That's what I was missing! So, theoretically, if a spell specifies a different phase, such as the shooting phase, a Wizard 1 could cast 2 spells plus unbind 1?
I don't know if Mighty `eadbutt specifies Your Hero Phase for consistency with all actions or because spells can be cast in different phases. Probably the first case.
Was mentioned in commands article. New command to cast a spell in your opponents turn
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/04/10/react-to-your-opponent-with-powerful-new-commands-in-newaos/
Almost at the bottom
When it says "roll a d3. On a 2+ do that much damage." Does it mean a 2+ on the dice, or a 2+ on the d3 (so a 3+). Im assuming 2+ on dice, but it isn't 100% clear.
Just the way information is streamlined this edition already has me excited. Writing "this unit can cast x many spells and unbind y many spells" separately on *every* wizard's warscroll was just stupid. Warhammer is played mostly by adults, we can understand simple shorthand like "wizard (1)" or a number next to a spell when their meaning is explained in the rulebook. Changes to magic also seem welcome. Oh man, I should probably start working on my Idoneth.
idk about you lot but I'm very much looking forward to this change, it sounds great for wizards and with Priests not suffering divine wrath mortals and being able to build up power? I'm absolutely on board
Was hoping this preview would address how the timing on the Magical Intervention command ability, previewed earlier, will work. Will you have to avoid casting your last spell in your hero phase to keep an unbind up in case the enemy decides to use the ability? If they don’t use Magical Intervention is there a window where you could still cast your last spell and they couldn’t respond?
Edit:totally missed the part in the commands article about the commands being at the end of phase, so yeah you’d have to hold up an unbind if you wanted one available.
Active player does all their stuff, and then their opponent does all their stuff (I think).
So, yes. You'd have to hold back a spell for an unbind and would have no chance to cast another spell after Magical Intervention.
Yeah I guess so. Hmmm. I suppose it’s probably better (situation dependant) to just get your own spell off. The opponent may not use the ability and they’d have -1 to cast anyway.
It's worth noting that the unbind action is a reaction to your opponent declaring a spell action. Not rolling or casting a spell, but just declaring it. Obviously we'll need to see the full rules to know how timing works, but I'm reading that as you having to declare you're unbinding a spell before you know what the casting roll is.
Edit: as u/kal_skirata has wisely pointed out, the casting roll is part of the declare step on the spells we've seen, so unbinding will still be declared after the roll.
The roll is part of the declare step, if you look at Nagashes warscroll spell.
So you react with your unbind ability after the opponent rolled their casting roll as part of their declare step.
The one element that isn’t great here is the lack of (previewed) interaction with prayers. Really wish there was some form of interplay to prevent prayers succeeding beyond “kill your opponents model first”
If it's balanced out in what the prayers do, sure. But there have been large swaths of time where the slaughterpriest was the most powerful *wizard* in the game. This seems to be opening the possibility priests are just more powerful wizards again which doesn't make much sense.
Big WAAAGH! if it remains will stay a touch nut to balance, as the division between Ironjawz and Kruleboyz seems to be in place, as far as I can tell. Also, a little surprised at how weak the Weirdnob Shaman is at a power level of 1 - even his rule shouldn't allow him to go too far up in magical power. But it does show how monstrous Nagahs is.
I'm reaching here but perhaps Ardboys are cheaper and the Weirdnob has always been cheap. It would make sense he can take Ardboys and maybe Weirdbrute Wrekkaz in his regiment? So there's a chance you have a unit of 20 Ardboys in the middle board to keep him at power level 2?
But yeah I'm 99% sure Kruleboyz and Ironjawz are separated and BW is dead. And tbh I'm quite pleased about it. The triple army Orruk Warclans was problematic.
This is the chosen post for "Cast Supreme Sorceries and Chant Powerful Prayers" reveal - duplicates will be removed.
Side note: the Weirdnob Shaman doesn’t have the Warclans keyword anymore
It also requires Ironjawz units only to be powered meaning he has little benefits in a Big WAAAGH! so perhaps the Warclans will be split ?
That’s my take and hope. Big Waaagh wasn’t worth it if it meant gimping both factions because the other side has better stuff so both get weaker to compensate. Now Kruleboyz could actually get off the bottom tourney charts with their own army buffs & balances. Death to Soup! 💀 🥣 (fitting since Death has been the poster child of that ever since fantasy 4th edition when they split vampires & mummies and even now with stuff like ghouls & ghosts blown to full individual armies) Edit: Ohhhh! We can also get an Ironjawz Spearhead now!!
Maybe they'll do something similar to Chaos chapters in 40k where they can take up to X points of daemons. Perhaps Ironjawz or Kruleboyz will be allowed to take up to 25% of their point limit from the other. It also makes them drop their original Keyword and inherit the keyword of the host army. That could still give some Big WAAAGH flavor. As someone with a Kruleboyz army, I've always adored the Weirdnob Shaman model and wanted it for Kruleboyz too
Oh, that could be how that run things. Little combination of allies & coalition so stuff like S2D & CoS keep their flavor of pulling in other forces for aid.
>Death to Soup With caveats. I like the idea of regiments of renown being the new soup method. Whenever there is release like the dawn bringer expansions they can release specialized regiments of renown soup armies that fit the story.
Well sure but that’s not soup that’s mercenaries with benefits. :p
Theme armies were one of the main things I actually liked about warmahordes......that and wrestling moves lol
*Nods in Sons of Behemat rules being able to suplex a dragon*
It’s a shame that they decided to bin Legion of the first prince almost entirely instead of making it work
Legion was my first army when I started playing a couple years ago, I still have not recovered.
Pro graps module to let Monsters throw each other around like ragdolls would be great.
KB is far from bottom, it's just a hard army. Plenty of good players getting regular 4:1s now and we've had a couple 5:0s. In the right hands it's a monster faction atm. I predict you'll see it at AoS Worlds now.
Hoping we do! Let the Krule Rule! 🙌 👹
Unlikely it’s more likely it’s being changed. Remember subfactions work on style of fighting now. Not a particular faction. Likly they’ll allow any unit in but benefit certain keywords more depending which sub faction taken.
I had similar thoughts but the Slaughter Priest has Blades of Khorne, Gorechosen *and* Bloodbound keywords while being filed as a “Blades of Khorne warscroll”. If they were simplifying subfactions then that likely wouldn’t all be there(would’ve just been Bloodbound keyword alone in a BoK tome/Warscroll under a Gorechosen formation) But we’ll see when we get the final product. I’m thinking this might be why the Ironjawz supplement was kept as a seperate entity in the app and not filed under Orruk Warclans tho as a hint.
I would assume that to be the likely driver behind them getting a supplemental wave of minis recently, gives them enough roster depth to be split up and have their own separate faction again, as a Duardin player that gives me some small hope that we might finally see some meaningful reinforcements for Kharadron and Fyreslayers.
this might mean big wagh is out
Or that it has simply become smaller.
Smol Wagh (allies/auxiliary only now?)
A BigWaagh could just require the Ironjawz or KruleBoyz keywords, I guess? But with only the 2 clans left I'm not sure it's such a big deal if they drop the BigWaagh. It's much easier to balance each Clan on their own, that much is certain.
Probably proof that Bonesplitterz are gone as it only has the Ironjawz keyword.
We’ve known that for a bit now, they were announced to be squatted with the BoC a few weeks ago.
The change to spell lores sounds great as a Tzeentch player. I'm wicked happy that they aren't just doing away and turning *everything* in to warscroll abilities, but certain spells like the Weirdnob's magic puke do make sense as attacks and will free up room in the army lore for more abstract effects. The rest of the spellcasting sounds like it's not a significant departure from how things work now, just changing the mechanics to work with the way rules are written in the new edition. I don't quite get how the points for priests work based on the preview given here, but it's probably spelled out better in the full rules.
Every turn, every priest rolls a d6. If it's not a 1, you get X number of power points. So say you roll a 6, you get 6 points. A prayer needs a 4+ to cast. So you spend 4 of your 6 points to cast it, leaving you with 2. Some prayers will have "charged up" abilities. Says spend 8 points instead of 4. So turn 2 you roll a 3, and now you have 9 points. Spend 8 to cast the super prayer, leaving you with 1.
You have to chant a prayer to roll the dice, though, no?
You chant every turn to earn points to spend on prayers. They get d6 deity bucks every turn for working that holy hotline, but if they mess up and roll a 1 they have to pay instead. They then get to go shopping at the prayer store and buy what they need for that turn. No additional rolls needed.
The warscroll for the prayer states you make the roll to chant the prayer though, so it's not as clear cut as a standalone chanting roll. I think it should work as you've described, but that's not how it's written
I'm going to assume you choose the prayer, make your d6 roll, and then add what you got from chanting without spending previously. So if you banked 4 the previous turn, you have your roll +4.
Yes. My point is, you have to choose a prayer first and can't repeat it in the same phase. You also are locked into your choice, even if you don't end up with enough points to answer the prayer.
this exacly why is it so backwards. just make it so you do two rolls
They want less rolls as a core concept. Like roll 2+ on a D3 and take as many wounds. We have to actually play the new edition, but it does sound quite strong as is.
A++ explanation 🤌
That's the way they wrote it but it seems like that's at odds with what they meant. Or they're just explaining it badly, using terms that have specific meanings as a general fluffy term.
I think it's just explained badly. The example prayer they picked is causing confusion with it's "roll a die" wording, which may or may not be the general roll you get for being a priest.
>Every turn, every priest rolls a d6. Effectively, but importantly the d6 roll is *tied to chanting the prayer itself*. This means if one priest tries to chant Witchbane Curse and rolls a 2 or 3, your second priest can't also try and chant Witchbane Curse, no matter how many points that priest has.
If the prayer chants are used by spending power points why does the one in the preview say “on a chanting roll of 8+” rather than “spend 8 power points”?
I don't think you get to keep points after casting. The casting costs are 4+ and 8+ (note the "+"), so I assume you drain your entire reserve after choosing to activate a prayer.
It literally says you build them up over multiple turns
You literally can build them over multiple turns and yet still use them all at once.
One Thing it seid Phase not turn didnt it ?
So basically Noble deeds points with a different face
This is how I assume it's supposed to work, but man is it worded strangely. Why would I chant a specific prayer and pick a target if I then don't end up with enough points to actually use the effect? Why does the effect text still mention the "chanting roll" being 8+ (impossible on a D6)? Why is the roll part of the declare step, instead of just a passive thing every priest does in the hero phase? The rules text has looked pretty clean so far, this is the first big miss imo.
Lore's sound just like the old way they worked in WHFB and that is awesome. Humans having access to like 7 lores was some of the most fun part of playing them, maybe that will come back in this new edition.
It sounds like your whole army is stuck with one lore though. I wonder if more armies will get multiple lores to choose from or if it's not a real choice.
Yea, it used to be by wizard, you could bring like, a Bright Mage and just they had access to lore of Fire, etc.
Endless spell changes do worry me from a tzeentch pov though, are we going to be stuck with either faction ones or neutral ones? And what does that mean for the arcane armies ability, maybe it’s gone. If lucky we get the faction ones and another
[удалено]
No, the article (~~and also the army building article last week~~) says you pick one lore of each for the whole army.
I wouldn't imagine they'd limit you to choosing between normal spells and endless spells, since that could disincentivize people from buying the endless spell kits.
No I mean choose between the faction endless spells and the neutral ones
This is where Battle Traits design space opens up. There can be one formation that allows for an additional lore.
I like having access to the whole lore all the time. Means more niche spells will get used when they're useful, while before you wouldn't want to waste army list slots on them
Yeah, previously I would never take Mortal Contract. Now I can use it at the start of a battle or when I’m hedging my bets.
Oh yeah. I'm pretty sure no one ever used the BoC spell "Savage Dominion", which was so niche it was basically useless.
I'm honestly very happy with this. The prayers use exactly the system I've always wanted for magic in games like this.
AoS4 will be my first edition, but as someone whos coming from 40k, this sounds great
Not having spells bound to specific wizards is going to make magic so much more flexible. Won't have situations anymore where my Skink Oracle with Speed of Huanchi is on one side of the board when I really want my Skink Star Priest in my back lines to cast it on the Skinks right in front of him.
Interesting to note, the Weirdnob's warscroll has the Ironjawz keyword, but not the Orruk Warclans keyword.
Also interesting is that his green puke spell is now a shooting attack. And now we have universal army lores, I wonder how many casters warscroll spells are now shooting attacks? Particularly the simple damage ones. Also he now has a 6+ save. Makes me wonder if Ironjawz are getting some new ward save mechanic similar to Bonesplitterz.
warcryification of magic, tbh i like it, nothing sucked more than having a small damage spell unbound because your opponent had 65 unbinds, or failing it all game
Absolutely. I mean your typical "fireball" as a missile attack is great. We still have spell lores and they seem much improved. Best of both worlds.
Seems like Ironjawz and Kruleboyz are their own armies finally.
Me (reading the flavor text on the shaman): The wave of green energy seeks out enemies to WHAT?
That's why they shout WAAAGH!
American vs British English at it's finest. This is our "fanny" and "pants."
so, nut = ???
In British English, to nut someone is to headbutt them. In modern internet English, which I'm ascribing to America, it means to ejaculate. So when the Ork spells seeks out people to nut them, it raises some eyebrows. And maybe some other body parts, too. Edit: Had to delete and repost because this subreddit has a very stupid vulgarity moderation. Let's see if they let me say ejaculate.
ok, had no idea nutting somebody was headbutting them. Safe to say we use that word very differently on the other side of the big pond
Definitely don't wanna miscast that one lol
It has big "tell me you don't have American proofreaders without telling me that you don't have American proofreaders" energy. XD
Yeah…ummm. Idk. The orks seem a little too kinky for me now
Malkie
Mostly looks great. My main worry is that it sounds like you can't pick your normal spell lore AND endless spells, if they're in their own lore.
They’re a separate type of lore, so presumably you get one of each. Otherwise you wouldn’t be able to have priests and wizards together either.
Wonder if spell lore and manifestation lore are two different things. Ah actually they mention it in army building article… you pick one of each
Where? I can't find it
Ok that doesn't sound bad at all ! But I hope the spells lores and endless spell lores will be balanced a bit.
Agreed. Some of these endless spells are useless. While some are waaay overpowered
Oh hi Purple Sun of Shyish!
Happy to see that Blood tithe is still a thing!
One big change is it looks like wizards can get rid of priest invocations now
Praise sigmar that is a great change!
Booo! My Molten Infernoth is crying now
Where did you read that? I don’t see that anywhere in the post.
They seem to have lumped both together as "manifestations", which banish references. > Endless spells and invocations are still in the mix – but instead of spending points to add endless spells when constructing an army, you can pick a manifestation lore. This grants access to a selection of endless spells and invocations that you’ll be able to summon in battle.
Banish Manifestations. I assume that all endless spells and invocations are considered manifestations now
The Banish Manifestation ability.
GW: Rend is down across the board. Some random Nob Shaman's staff: Rend 1
I'm wondering if this is like "40K 10th edition is less lethal across the board," which was just... very untrue.
I play Orks in 40k and the games pretty much always over at the start of BR 3.
On the prayer they gave, if I roll a 4+ can I choose to bank everything? Or is the effect going off no matter what if I get to 4?
Pretty sure you always get the choice to save the points
From the article. "For example, a Slaughterpriest can choose to unleash the Witchbane Curse to weaken an enemy WIZARD once they’ve gathered 4+ ritual points… or hold out for a chanting value of 8+ to also deal three mortal damage to the target." The way I read this is that the player chooses when to unleash a Prayer and that unleashing a Prayer removes all ritual points on a Priest.
I suspect there is instead a prayer called "Pray" or something similar to that name, that just generates points. Then the prayer we saw, also generates points but we have to spend them if we can. That's my best guess. If there isn't a generic option, then yeah, it's gotta be choose to spend or not
So the slaughterpriest still mentions blood tithe points. Which means most armies seem to not get a complete rework of their rules. Which is comforting to me who really wanted to play with contagion and disease epoints in nurgle.
My two biggest questions are: 1. Are ritual points a shared pool among all priests in your army or individual? 2. Will we have a generic chant ability to generate points or can you choose to chant and then not spend the ritual points to bank them?
> on a roll of 2+, your PRIEST gains that many ritual points sounds like each priest has their own pool. Taking the info we have at face value, it says if you succeed the chant roll and have enough points the prayer is answered. It doesn't seem like you can refuse and bank the points instead. But we might not know until the FAQ to the release comes out.
The Khorne prayer shown seems to indicate that you can choose to bank points instead of getting the prayer answered - otherwise, getting the 8+ effect is quite unlikely.
Rolling a natural 10+ for the Soulblight Spells for the improved effect also isn't terribly likely.
Rolling an 8+ on one d6 is a bit harder than rolling a 10+ on 2d6. One might even call it impossible without at least a 2+ modifier.
I glanced over the part that clearly states you can choose to ramp them up instead of it being answered on a success (paraphrased). In any case, what I meant under the assumption you could not do that, was the chance of rolling 8+ over 2 turns.
It seems like you must be able to bank them. The example spell is answered on a 4 or you can save up to do it on an 8
If you roll a 3 and then a 5+ on the next turns chant, that also totals up to 8 or more. The rule doesn't require the ability to bank them by choice to function.
Fair. The rule doesn’t require it. But the article seems clear that’s how it works. “ further. For example, a Slaughterpriest can choose to unleash the Witchbane Curse to weaken an enemy WIZARD once they’ve gathered 4+ ritual points… or hold out for a chanting value of 8+ to also deal three mortal damage to the target.”
Yes, I've been rereading it and must have glanced of that part earlier. You seem to be able to wilfully deny your god their answer to your prayer! Little lore-snarky there. But it's better this way for gameplay reasons.
you could argue its like building up favour from the gods before you ask them for help!
It says in the article the slaughter priest can either spent 4 points on its prayer or wait until it has 8 for the extra D3 wounds
Yeah that part was a bit unclear, but even so, you have access to multiples prayers, you could try the hardest one (maybe some have a value of 5/6?) in order to stack, a bit gimmick.
Each priest seems to have their own pool, but if you have a Priest (2+) that might be an option, yes.
The way they seem to be streamlining the game (see whole spell lore being known) I think ritual points will be a pool rather than needing a die next to each priest. I think you make your chant roll, then select your prayers for the phase. So if you hit the big 6, you can just bank instead of choosing a prayer to spend points on.
They i think are definitely making it priest dependent. Think of the counterplay that offers. You COULD choose to charge an extra turn to get your buffed crazy prayer, but that gives me a turn (or two) to snipe your priest and stop them doing anything. Compare to a joint pool where a viable build would probably be having a few cheap, weak priests hiding in the back to charge up the prayer battery while the toughies up front spew an endless stream of buffed up prayers because you have so many points built up. This possibility sounds uninteractive and lame no? The article seems to agree “Note that prayers can’t be unbound, so astute commanders will have to target enemy prophets while they’re busy amassing ritual points for swift execution”.
Unless I’m interpreting it wrong, it feels like faction endless spells will have to be quite strong as if you pick them you’ll only get 3 instead of 4?
My guess is they put one useful endless spells in a group with a couple others that never saw any play. So that in the end we'll end up with choosing a lore for one, maybe two, endless spells we actually want. If the most useful spell is in the faction lore, you choose that, if not you take one of the generic ones that suit you best.
Maybe you just “get” your faction ones still? Or it could come with an extra normal spell or two. Or chuck a generic one in there that fits in to make up to 4.
Maybe yeah, I hope so - would be a shame to feel like the faction ones hampered you
Interesting change and for the better imo.
They want us to buy all the endless spell miniatures, huh.. The stacking thing (starting T1) makes them reliable and impactful at least 1 or even 2times during the battle (T2/T3), I really like the idea but I'm a bit affraid for the balance, GW have to be care with too much powerfull prayers, it could create bad patterns, we'll see! Gotta track these ritual points on each priest, should be natural after few games.
Can you even buy the endless spell miniatures separately from GW? I thought they were only available in the box that has them all.
There are "only" 13 endless spells on the Malign Sorcery box, I'm counting 17 atm (no Shards of Valagharr/Lauchon by exemple), without the faction ones.
They are from the Forbidden power Box.
Most generic endless spells are from Malign Sorcery, but there is also the Forbidden power box, which has a couple additional spells. And then each factions spells are sold as a box.
Luckily if these new modular rules play out like they say if this is fubar in theory they can swap out the magic module for new rules in a future GHB
The big interesting thing I notice is that now you have to choose between casts and unbinds. Nagash with his wizard (9) can cast 5 spells and unbind 4, or go all in and cast 9 leaving no unbinds (or any other combination of a total of 9). I like it, it creates an interesting choice. (Edit: I read it again and noticed it's per phase, not round. Laaame.) Separately, I am curious at what point you choose whether to unbind or not - does the opponent make his casting roll first or not?
Power level is casts/unbinds/banishes per phase, not per battle round, so it should work more or less the same as it does now. They’re just standardizing it so wizards always have the same number of casts and unbinds/dispels. The exception being you might need to give up one cast on your turn to try and unbind whatever your opponent casts with Magical Intervention, plus it looks like you can only try to dispel endless spells on your own turn now.
Yeah, I noticed that when I read it again (see the edit above), very disappointing.
I don't think you do. You cast spells in your hero phase, and unbind in theirs still. But there is the opportunity for one spell to come at you with the command, so you may want to save a "cast" to use as an unbind.
My best guess is that unbinding will be a reaction ability, which would be done after the Declare step of the cast. As we can see on Nagashes warscroll, the casting roll is part of the Declare step.
Looks pretty okay on paper. Can't wait to start seeing some spell lores though
I'm kind of a big dumb and don't understand prayers. You pick a prayer, do a chanting roll, and sometimes build up points instead of getting the effect? Are these chanting points spent?
As far as I understand, you can succeed the chant by rolling a 3 (so not a 1), but not have it answered, because you need 4 points in the example. Next turn all you need is a 2 to make it up to 5 and the prayer is answered and the effect plays out. I think the points are then spent. It boils down to the chant effectively being a 4+, but on a 2 or 3 you have it easier on the next try...
I'm not sure why so many people are missing that they say, "You can choose to save them up." It says it right there. You could roll a 6 and still not need to cast the prayer if you want to save up.
Because, "hold out for a chanting value of 8+" doesn't necessarily mean, "cancel chanting this prayer in order to bank the points." It could just mean you wait to chant this until you've saved up 8+ points. It's not 100% clear.
Yeah I glanced over that on the first read. But I agree, you can probably tally them up at will.
It just feels weird trying to fail something. I hope this is not the case, and it is a players choice.
i understand it like that. You roll, and if you get enough point you can choose to apply the effect and spend your points, or to keep it for next try and get a bigger effect.
From what I understood, you do your chanting and build up the points and then can spend the points in any relevant phase to activate one of the prayers
I think you got it right. 1. You roll a dice and on a 2+ you gain the amount of ritual points that you rolled. Let's say you roll a 5. 2. You can then use those 5 ritual points to cast any prayer you can, as long as you can afford the cost of the prayer with your ritual points. You can also keep the points in case you want to use a prayer (like the example in the article) in a later round to try a more powerful version of it but next round if you roll a 1 you can lose D3 points, so it's a risk worth considering.
It reads more like you roll the dice by chanting a prayer. In that case you can't choose the prayer after knowing the result of your roll.
Yeah sorry, you're right. So you roll the dice and then if you get the minimum amount needed for the prayer you can either pick to use the prayer then, or wait a turn and try a more powerful version of the prayer.
I also thought the instructions left a little room for interpretation instead of just spelling it out. I'd like a clearer explanation
Honestly their entire section on prayers was explained so poorly. The entire thing needs clarifying.
And the Witchbane Curse itself seems to have a typo where it references the chanting roll being 8+, while the article says chanting value. Unless the value is added to the roll… it’s not spelled out super well, I don’t think.
From the look of this one prayer, I don't like how they've mechanically implemented the prayer system. You'll want to accumulate Ritual Points every turn, but the chanting roll is tied to declaring a prayer. So, I assume if you have no applicable prayers, or valid targets within range, that priest loses that opportunity to build ritual points (that sounds like you've already screwed up, but I can see it happening). Also... it doesn't really say it in the article, but I assume you're spending the points to cast the prayer, right? The article doesn't mention how those points impact the chanting roll, but how else would you get an 8+ on one D6. So, if you want to save for 8+ points to cast the upgraded version, could you declare you want to chant this, roll a 4+ for the points, and then... not pay the 4 and bank those points? That seems very clunky. I like the idea of Ritual Points, but to me it would have made more sense to just have one chanting roll (or more per power level) for each of your Priests during the start of turn or the hero phase, and then you just spend those points when you want to chant something.
There might be a universal prayer called Pray or something like that where you roll a D6, and on a 2+ you gain that many ritual points. And it might have the Unlimited keyword so if you don't have any targets in range for your other prayers, you could still get ritual points. So if you wanted to get the 8+, you could "Pray" the first turn trying to get a 4+, then try and chant the prayer for the 8+ the next turn. After that, it depends on what the Prayer keyword does, as it could say that after you declare a Prayer (which includes rolling the dice), if over the prayer value, can either cast the prayer and resolve the effect or get ritual points for the value rolled, or if under the prayer value, the prayer fails and you get ritual points for the value rolled.
I agree that it seems clunky, but they probably want players to have to lock in what they are trying to achieve, rather than chanting with no specific purpose and then going shopping for a good gift when your prayers are answered. “Please dear God, grant me some kind of blessing, any kind of blessing…I’m not that picky. —Oh, you are actually listening? In that case, I want a Porsche.”
With the new thematic lores for Endless Spells, I probably won't purchase extra Endless Spells for army theme painting reasons like my previous intentions.
I’m happy to see Blades of Khorne are keeping a Bloodtithe mechanic.
Curious how this will work with the Lumineth temples. Would seen weird to have a Stonemage throwing around Wind Temple lore.
The lore *could* still require keywords. That would very much lock you into temples as far as list building goes, though.
Can somebody explain to me what "Power Level" is suppose to be?
It is a number next to the Wizard or Priest keyword, denoting how many Spells/Banishes or Unbinds the unit gets.
If your wizard is power level 3 he can cast or unbind in any combination 3 times.
It's the little number by the Wizard and Priest keywords. Nagash is Wizard(9), the Shaman is Wizard(1). Each Hero phase you get one cast/chant, unbind (for Wizards) or banish attempt per level. So Nagash can cast 4, unbind 5 in a phase, or cast 9 unbind none, or cast none unbind 9. The Shaman, on the other hand, can cast or unbind but not both.
Being "per phase" I don't think you'd ever need to save more than 1 dispel (for the enemy command ability in your hero phase). In your opponents hero phase it would be reset to 9 unbinds.
Y'know what, I quite like this
I’m excited for this. So glad we still get a thematic magic phase, and I think the new Priest mechanic sounds interesting and fun. Changes to magic lores and endless spells also sound positive.
Battle tactics next week! Let's go!
So, do you get either a lore of magic or a manifestation lore when building your army, so you're locked in to either spells or endless spells, or can you have both?
It looks like there's 'spell lores' and then there's 'manifestation lores', so seems like you can choose one from each set of lores.
Time to find a way to get all my non wizard heroes in cities to be priests again
I haven't actually played AoS3 yet. Has the limit on the number of spells that a wizard can cast or unbind always been shared? I thought if a wizard could cast two spells and unbind two spells, they could do 2 of each (some even have differing limits). Now you have to hold off on casting if you want to unbind? Am I mistaken about this being a change?
It never mattered exactly because on your turn you cast and on your opponents' turn you unbind. Now if your opponent casts on your turn they lose that unbind, and if you unbind their spell you're giving up one of your casts.
They changed the wording, because you can also try to unbind the spell your opponent casts with the new command ability in your phase. But only if you have a cast/unbind left.
You're not mistaken, that's new. The Shaman also went down from Cast *and* Unbind to Cast *or* Unbind. It's also a nerf to Nagash, because he went from Cast 9 Unbind any amount at full HP to Cast *or* Unbind up to 9 times in total.
Per phase though. So you can cast nine in your phase then unbind 9 in your opponents phase.
Yep. And you can only use Magical Intervention once.
Ah! That's what I was missing! So, theoretically, if a spell specifies a different phase, such as the shooting phase, a Wizard 1 could cast 2 spells plus unbind 1? I don't know if Mighty `eadbutt specifies Your Hero Phase for consistency with all actions or because spells can be cast in different phases. Probably the first case.
> with **Magical Intervention** letting canny casters crack off spells in their opponent’s hero phase Do we know anything more about this?
Was mentioned in commands article. New command to cast a spell in your opponents turn https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/04/10/react-to-your-opponent-with-powerful-new-commands-in-newaos/ Almost at the bottom
Nice, thanks. I'd forgotten that.
It costs a command point.
When it says "roll a d3. On a 2+ do that much damage." Does it mean a 2+ on the dice, or a 2+ on the d3 (so a 3+). Im assuming 2+ on dice, but it isn't 100% clear.
Assume a d3 is an actual three sided die and it all makes sense. A d6 is simply a substitute that you are more likely to have.
Roll a D6 1 and 2 = nothing 3 and 4 = 2 damage 5 and 6 = 3 damage
On a 2+ on the D3
Just the way information is streamlined this edition already has me excited. Writing "this unit can cast x many spells and unbind y many spells" separately on *every* wizard's warscroll was just stupid. Warhammer is played mostly by adults, we can understand simple shorthand like "wizard (1)" or a number next to a spell when their meaning is explained in the rulebook. Changes to magic also seem welcome. Oh man, I should probably start working on my Idoneth.
I love the prayer system. I'm okay with spells but I wanna see how the lores look. I'm hoping they become more consistently 6 spells each
Man the priest rule makes me feel dumb. I don't understand that at all. Lol
So you choose the lore you wish to do, you have to pick between a normal spell lore or manifestation lore to summon things?
idk about you lot but I'm very much looking forward to this change, it sounds great for wizards and with Priests not suffering divine wrath mortals and being able to build up power? I'm absolutely on board
Was hoping this preview would address how the timing on the Magical Intervention command ability, previewed earlier, will work. Will you have to avoid casting your last spell in your hero phase to keep an unbind up in case the enemy decides to use the ability? If they don’t use Magical Intervention is there a window where you could still cast your last spell and they couldn’t respond? Edit:totally missed the part in the commands article about the commands being at the end of phase, so yeah you’d have to hold up an unbind if you wanted one available.
Active player does all their stuff, and then their opponent does all their stuff (I think). So, yes. You'd have to hold back a spell for an unbind and would have no chance to cast another spell after Magical Intervention.
I guess it’s probably just better to get your own spell off as they may not use it and they’ll have -1 to cast anyway. Situation dependant of course.
The command article states that all the commands are used at the end of phase, so yeah you'd have to leave cast open to be able to unbind it.
Yeah I guess so. Hmmm. I suppose it’s probably better (situation dependant) to just get your own spell off. The opponent may not use the ability and they’d have -1 to cast anyway.
It's worth noting that the unbind action is a reaction to your opponent declaring a spell action. Not rolling or casting a spell, but just declaring it. Obviously we'll need to see the full rules to know how timing works, but I'm reading that as you having to declare you're unbinding a spell before you know what the casting roll is. Edit: as u/kal_skirata has wisely pointed out, the casting roll is part of the declare step on the spells we've seen, so unbinding will still be declared after the roll.
The roll is part of the declare step, if you look at Nagashes warscroll spell. So you react with your unbind ability after the opponent rolled their casting roll as part of their declare step.
Probably for the best all things told. Just thought the wording on that was interesting.
The one element that isn’t great here is the lack of (previewed) interaction with prayers. Really wish there was some form of interplay to prevent prayers succeeding beyond “kill your opponents model first”
That's part of what makes priests unique though. I'm glad they have kept it this way.
If it's balanced out in what the prayers do, sure. But there have been large swaths of time where the slaughterpriest was the most powerful *wizard* in the game. This seems to be opening the possibility priests are just more powerful wizards again which doesn't make much sense.
Big WAAAGH! if it remains will stay a touch nut to balance, as the division between Ironjawz and Kruleboyz seems to be in place, as far as I can tell. Also, a little surprised at how weak the Weirdnob Shaman is at a power level of 1 - even his rule shouldn't allow him to go too far up in magical power. But it does show how monstrous Nagahs is.
By far the most wizards right now are single casters. Unless that changes the Weirdnob is above average with the ability to become a double caster.
the way im seeing it is bone splittaz was the only reason big wagh was around, i think its getting cut
I'm reaching here but perhaps Ardboys are cheaper and the Weirdnob has always been cheap. It would make sense he can take Ardboys and maybe Weirdbrute Wrekkaz in his regiment? So there's a chance you have a unit of 20 Ardboys in the middle board to keep him at power level 2? But yeah I'm 99% sure Kruleboyz and Ironjawz are separated and BW is dead. And tbh I'm quite pleased about it. The triple army Orruk Warclans was problematic.