Upon Reflection, The Perspective of Time Passed

Now that the new book for our beloved army has been out for a while, and with the Vampire book showing us a different take on what it means to be undead, and with hundreds of games played, from social games to tournament games, comped and non-comped, against players from different regions of the country and different parts of the world, with lists that are heavy on spells to those that are light, those that are infantry based to those that focus on constructs and cavalry/chariots, in scenarios from the book and in just straight up battles...you get the point....

Now that there is a lot of highly varied experience, time passed, and things to compare to, I thought I'd put up my personal list of "The Things That Would Make Tomb Kings Compete on a Level Playing Field."

This topic has come up before, but with time and an evolving gaming scene, things change. In particular, the ability to see the alternate treatment of the undead in the VC book really gives some insights.

So, without further ado, here are my two lists. The first list is the changes I would make to rules to bring the book in line with the others. The second is a points-based approach to the same thing (in other words, all rules stay the same, but points get adjusted).

Rules Changes Approach
- Ushabti get S5 and halberds - helps with stomp and lets them use their initiative. Plus, it just makes no sense at all that a weedy little Tomb Guard and a mighty Ushabti have the same Strength.

- Ushabti can take a 50pt magic banner - lets them get Undying Legion to stay around longer. Plus, if VC can have multiple units that can take 50pt banner, another that can get a 25pt banner, and yet another that can have a 75pt banner (all in addition to the BSB), I see no overall game-balance reason to limit the number of banners.

- Constructs can heal one wound per augment - It's far too easy to take out these things right now. Any pretense that it's somehow a way to balance these beasts went out the window with VC.

- Any unit that contains a character model can march, if the unit would normally be allowed to do so were it not undead - this reflects the will of the kings and princes, the magical motivation of liches, the death-craft skills of the necrotects, and the military memories of soldiers following their heralds. It gives heralds a reason to live and infantry a reason to be taken. Again, the number of ways around no marching for VC shows us that undead do not have to be slow to be balanced.

- Kings and Princes should be allowed to ride horses, and maybe even Snakes - would make them both much more viable choices.

- Stalker gaze misfires just mean no shots - Other armies with similar rules (roll artillery dice, do something cool) just ignore the misfire. This is a "balancing" factor that is not needed and smacks of the fluff getting in the way.

- Colossus gets hatred (or really just re-rolls on the Unstoppable Assualt) - The main cool rule for these guys is just sooo fickle. Do the math on on it and see how many wounds you can expect. Sure, sometimes you get really lucky, but this is not Skaven or Orcs, it's Tomb Kings. Leave praying to the dice gods to other armies.

- Colossus gets a 3+ armor save.

- Entombed is optional - could even treat it like Snakes if you want, making it a pay-for-use upgrade. If you don't want to tunnel, don't pay the upgrade points. Ideally, you should be able to tunnel or not tunnel each game (for tournaments) but as the game is designed to allow you to tweak your list for each game, it could just follow the Snake upgrade path.

- If Marching is not allowed with characters in units, it should at least be allowed for all characters and for all constructs.

- The chariot of a King or Prince should be treated as a combined profile like Monstrous Beasts - It's far too easy to take out a completely unprotected 3 wound T4 chariot and neuter the chariot unit or the lone King (who cannot even March to safety after his ride goes bye-bye.)

- Halberd for free. Seriously. - Great Weapons are 1pt on heavy armor Grave Guard. Why the hell is +1 S (and still losing the parry and shield save) +2pts but +2S is +1pt? This one is a no-brainer, and something of a slap to the face via the VC book. As is...

- Spears for free - if I have to lose my parry save for one more S3 attack per file, it should not cost me anything. GW realized this with VC, and it should be retroactively applied to all armies.


That's that list. There were other pie-in-the-sky dreams too (charge on turn Entombed models come up, ward saves on constructs, charge reactions allowed, Princes as BSBs, Ld check to avoid and Unstable losses from combat, liches never miscast or total power when casting a Nehekharan augment, etc) but I genuinely think the combination of the above things would open up new style options (more cav! infantry that can see a fight _it_ picks, etc), make some models playable again (swarms, scorpions, Ushabti), and generally bring it in line with the other 8th edition books without making it uber-powerful.


Now the other way to look at it...

Points-based Approach
Chariots - 45pts
Ushabti - 30pts
Snakes - 50pts
Stalkers - 45pts
Heralds - 40pts
Necrotect - 50pts
Character chariots - 40pts (for the loss of crew)
Sphinx mount - 150pts (for the loss of crew)
Warsphinx - 175pts
Necrosphinx - 175pts
Screaming Skull catapult - 70pts
Skulls of the Foe upgrade - 10pts
Skeletons - 3pts
Skeleton bowmen - 4pts
Tomb Guard - 9pts
Swarms - 35pts
Scorpion - 50pts
Horsemen - 10pts
Horse Arches - 12pts


Personally, I'd prefer to use the top list since it would encourage more dynamic and fun play, whereas the bottom list still makes the army boring, slow, and painful to play, but at least lets you survive a few more rounds before getting tabled.

admittedly having only looked at the points (yet)

you make everything cheaper? why man? that can't be fair with respect to the fact that we are midtier allready.

I'll agree with almostthe entire top list except kings on horses and snakes. I can't get past the fluff. A king wouldn't lower himself to ride a horse. And snake riders have sacrificed their bodies to become part of the snake. A king that was planning on living for an eternity in a golden kingdom would not have done that.

I think you lowered too many units in price though. Chariots Necro knights skeleton warriors (not archers) and ubi yes. Everything else no

This is your problem right here:

combined with:

the completely unwarranted VC envy still getting too you?

TK's need NO changes to make them "compete on a level playing field" I'm sure wood elves players would wet themselves to have some of the options we have. The two list you post just seem like "things i would like to make it easier to win." really not understanding where you are getting this negative vibe about Tomb Kings from!

Ushabti - you say makes no sense they are only STR4 the same as a tomb guard or an OGRE, or in fact most other monstrous infantry (vargheists etc.) If anything makes less sense that tomb guard should be as strong as Ushabti why not make them STR3 instead? (the logic goes both ways here) Halberds would be cool but really? STr6 monstous infantry hitting on I with the banner of the undying legion, sure that will make lots of fun games...and everyone else will want their monstrous infantry to be spruced up to match.

Banners - because as undead we need lots of them. Just VC envy again. Sure VC can take 25pt banners on most core units, and a 50pt banner in some others, but none of their monstrous infantry can take a banner at all - and you are suggesting a Ushabti banner bearer! see above point.

Because having T8 monsters that can be healed up to maximum is not overpowered? having problems keeping your constructs alive then use them differently! frankly have no problems keeping mine alive at all bar Cannons but heck they kill ANY monster.

what is your obsession with marching? VC have NO SHOOTING therefore will need to march to get anywhere without being rinsed. Tk's being slower can often work to our advantage as allows EBTS units to get into good position T2/3 for a combo-charge from both directions. It is not needed in a TK army.

talk about misfires with a skaven player! since they have 3 wounds hurting themselves is often moot.

i could go on, but most of this just reads VC's have this! I want this! it's not fair. If you have such a big issue just play VC's or learn to adapt to the unique and interesting play style of the Tomb Kings, with both their strengths and weakness's.

rant over.

I agree with some points (like allowing a Prince to ride a snake (them being the generals/captains of a King could definitely "fail" to such a severe extent they could perform the ritual suicide. Thus working with the fluff. A King might be stretching it though.)

I also agree that lone characters should be allowed to march, good god how annoying it is to move a character from one unit to another... (And hey, it would give some utility to a horse mounted herald), but allowing units to march might be a bit much (I mean we already have the potentially fastest chariots in the game). I agree the Ushabti need SOMETHING to alleviate their high points cost, giving them S5 with halberds while still keeping them at 50 points would be balanced in my mind as few (new) monstrous infantry cost over 40 as far as I'm aware. That or lower them to around 40, but oh well.

I think the healing limitation on Non-Large Target constructs should be removed, but due to our easy access to long range bubble augments letting them be healed multiple times would be too good against many armies. Overall I think you've got a few good points but overall if all of these changes (either list) would be implemented I think TK would go from balanced (in my mind) to completely overpowered. Especially the second list as it would make most units ridiculously cheap.

hey id like to add my two cents =]

being an outsider who has never played with the Tomb Kings (being a high elf player) i have played the Tk many times and have spectated many of their battles, they are by fare one of the most level playing field armies in the game, i can never beat them with high elves even with my "making friends teclis" they dont need to be changed, as of right now they are exactly where they should be.


the VC right now seem the new Competetive top tier army but give it a couple of months then come back to this and see where we are, we cant judge aries yet when half the books are still 7th ed.

The snake fluff didn't exist, at all, until a few months ago. Fluff is whatever GW says it is. Period.

Even the whole "horses are beneath kings" thing can be _easily_ written away. All you have to do is say something like "A noble king or prince would not ride some mere steed, such as the common troops might push into battle. For a king, only a kingly steed will do. The master of horses will be given the finest horse when a Nehekharan ruler has a son. It is the job of the Master to breed this horse with other perfect specimens to create the mightiest, most regal mount so that when the newborn prince becomes a ruler, he will have the best bred steed in his city. Blah, blah, blah..."

The point is, fluff is bent to match the desires of its master, the rules.


@Pox - It's not VC jealousy, not really anyway. It's more that we can now see what a more proper, considered, and reasonable treatment of the undead rules can look like, and thus a harsh light is shown on the failure of Cruddace to be able to write fair rules.

I won't go into each of your reply comments, but I will take one to show where we seem to have a fundamental difference - the T8 comment. You say you seem my "problem." Well, I see yours. You believe, as the author did, that T8 means some sort of relative immunity to all but great cannons. Experience on the 8th edition table top shows otherwise. Since all things wound on a 6, it takes only massed fire/attacks to do the job of a cannon. I've lost sphinxes to plenty of armies that hit it with bows, crossbows, handguns, javelins, and other minor shooting. In 8th, you cannot hide. You get shot. The 5+ save is a joke. Being able to fix only a single wound per turn, for a model that cannot march, cannot hide, cannot bait and flee, and is wounded on all sixes, is a problem, and one that the author of the VC book took note of and fixed. Hell, even a block of skaven slaves is going to take out a Sphinx without all that much trouble.

Urrg, I normally bite my tongue but the levels of defence for the Tomb Kings is getting to Minecraft levels, by which I mean people are jumping all over anyone who says anything negative because Tomb Kings are perfect and can do no wrong! Okay, they might be a bit of an exaggeration, but come on, you have to admit the Tomb Kings are NOT perfect. I don't think they're quite the red headed step child of Fantasy that they sometimes get treated as, but everything that gets brought up is valid.

* T8 on a sphinx is useless when it gets so easily negated by poison (poisoning stone? REALLY?), or unstable. I think it's ridiculous everything can wound everything else anyway, I much prefer the 40K approach of "If you can't wound it, tough luck". So yea, constructs DO need better healing.

* I can't speak about the Ushabti really since I've not used them, but on paper they just don't seem worth it. If they were a bit cheaper or a bit tougher than Tomb Guard, I'd have taken them long ago.

*EBTS really does need to be optional, if only to provide us with more tactical control. You can no longer get into CC with it, so it's not good in some situations. At least Deep Strike in 40K is optional, so you don't have to needlessly sacrifice CC only units.

*Marching is a bit of an interesting one. I think maybe our constructs should be able to march (they're supposedly stronger anyway), but possibly not our bog standard undead. As others have said, we get shooting whilst VC don't. I've never found myself going "man I wish I could march", apart from maybe once.

On the flip side of the coin, Tomb Kings are not the worst army out there either. Our shooting is great! No modifiers at all? BRILLIANT. Healing is done well too (apart from Constructs, that needs to change). Chariots as core? Love it. Of course I'm mostly a modeler, so the biggest plus for me is a gorgeous looking army.

But yea, people need to stop sticking their head in the sand about the Tomb King issues. It's great the forums aren't screaming "ABANDON ALL HOPE!" now, but we're heading in the opposite direction and that's just as annoying. We can only adapt our play style to work with the Tomb Kings, but making excuses for them such as "they're not an easy army" isn't good, and neither is accusing anyone of wanting some of the much needed changes of wanting an "I win" button.

And if you're not playing at tournaments? Tweak the rules yourself, and fix the issues. I know, I know, to some of you (some more than others ) that idea is HERESY, but if you're unhappy with the rules currently then do it! Even if it's just to test them out and prove if it does make them more balanced or not.

Finally, I'm a big fluff person. I think rules SHOULD reflect the fluff... buuuuut there needs to be a limit. My army fluff would totally support a Tomb King being on a horse (he's a disgrace as far as the rest of the Tomb Kings are concerned and he doesn't consider himself above others), but there's no option for it. Similarly, why can't a Liche Priest, or even a High Liche Priest take a chariot? We need to protect him, it'd just make sense. Hell, even a King on a snake could work. Army of the Lunatic King anyone?

So those are my thoughts. I doubt we're gonna see changes unless we contact GW about it in a unified way en-mass, but I don't see that happening really. So in the mean time, whilst we are not the worst army out there, there ARE issues that should be addressed. Don't pin it all on being jealous of our Vamparic cousins.

The ONLY thing I would have liked would be for a prince/king on a horse.

OTherwise, I wouldnt change a thing. I play several armies, several games. TO be honest, I suck. I constantly make mistakes. Forget important things.

Most of my opponents are well schooled in the arts of war. I am now finding myself on par with them. They no longer table me; they must fight, and hard, for every victory point.

I find most of the issues you point out arent a problem. It's easy to get around them.

This reads more like a wish list than trying ot fix anything wrong with the army. Anyone I know outside of this forum, and a good majority of the people in the forum think the army is well balanced, with lots of options.

For a reality check, i dig out my other armies. Then all the things we take for granted with the TK becomes apparent.

IT seems like it is perhaps your playstyle doesnt agree with how you WANT to run the TK. You cant expect a scorp to pop out exactly where needed and take down a block of infantry. What he is designed for he does an excellent job at.

Ushabti are pricey. RIghtfully so!!! Good ld, high str, lotsof attacks. They MAUL!!!!

Same as my old supervisor who used the good wood chisels to open paint cans and then complained they were chipped and broken. You gotta use the right tools, and use them right!

Thanks for putting a lot of what I was thinking in writing. I'm pretty new here but a lot of your suggestions ring true even with my limited experience. I think you've missed major points on hierophant must be highest wiz level/nek lore and steadfast not affecting crumble. Also, I think it's stretching it to ask for march(we can still be faster than dwarfs or chaos IMHO) and the hatred on colossus(though I would love 3+ save and would use him without lore of light or settra.)

Having had a good long read of the VC book, i fail to see how it is "better" or more "proper and considered" then the TK book. It has a different play style, it works differently but is in no way "better" i believe this has been discussed elsewhere on the forum in more detail so no need to bog it down here. But give it a month and most people will agree that VC's are another balanced list once they get past the shock.

as for T8 being a joke, yup everyone wounds on 6's and you know it before the game starts. most of the things you say that can "easily" kill it - suffer from either short range (so will most likely suffer move and shooting penalty + long range penalty) and at the end of the day if enough bows crossbows and handguns shoot anything it will die. Things die, people need to accept it and factor it into your plans. As for skaven slaves remember since we are only on a chariot sized base only 15 skaven slaves are going to hit you back (assuming a horde formation) needing 4's to hit (also assuming past terror/fear) and then 6's to wound - whereas the VC terrorgeisht is on a MASSIVE base and all 30 skaven slaves will be attacking it in return with 4's to hit and 6's to wound but twice the attacks. Cool we can only get 1 wound back a turn but can the terrorgeist even do that?

fail to note how the VC book "fixed" the problem of monsters dying? and surely monsters should be able to die or else we might as well play monster hammer.

The biggest changes for me would be fairly minor in nature.

I'd like to see the following

- Tomb Guard with 1pt Halberds

- Skeletons with the option to switch to spears for free

- EBTS optional, then I'd actually consider taking scorpions etc


If these 3 things were adjusted I would be happy.

There are also things I'd like fixed which in my opinion are more major changes. Biggest 3 are the following

- TK/Prince chariots only being T4 with 3 wounds. These need to be more like monstrous beasts

- Ushabti reduction in points. When you compare them to the new vamp options on 40mm bases they are over costed.

- Horsemen need to be fixed. Weather it is a substantial reduction in points or the abiltity to mount a king/prince in the unit.

Time of Madness

=> Oh, I agree with that totally. My issue is the disconnect. When Cruddace pimped the book, he talked about the sheer immunity to all but a direct cannon shot to the face. This tells me he _thought_ he was designing a very resilient model by giving it T8. The truth is, as you allude to, it's no more resilient to 'little stuff' than anything T5 or better. T8 really, truly, doesn't mean much, even if the author _thinks_ it does (he really seems to have overlooked the change to the T chart). If he wanted it to be so resilient, he needed to find another way to do it.

=> Yes, it can. It can get back all its wounds, each and every turn, at a rate of two wounds per casting.

What forum are you going to????? This forum is full of negativity. I think you have that the wrong way around my friend. This is by far the worst forum for hating their own army I have been to, and I have quite a few armies.

Anyway a couple of issues I agree with:

Ushabti are utterly overpriced. Seriously it's also a really bad business call for GW because they are gorgeous models. If they were lower priced or stronger people would be buying them hand over first. Sometimes GW, I really do wonder what planet you are on...

The whole T8 thing worries me in that I think GW in general has got monsters badly wrong. I would rather them be more points and just be a lot harder to kill. Toughness 8 sounds amazing but my sphinxes really never seem to last regardless of the tactics I use. Numbers ALWAYS prevail. When someone rolls a lot of dice they will get a few 6 sixes. It's OK saying "use them as support" but as already mentioned a billion times, we cannot march so getting other units over to that combat can be painfully slow. Plus it's really with monsters to lose on Combat Res because of bloody ranks!!

That brings me onto the other point, marching. Everyone I play with and talk to completely agrees about that being rubbish. What's the reason for it? Their undead so they're slow... OK so why can VC's skellies march because they are with a Vampire? Is he acting as Drill Sergeant? "move it move it move it". I don't understand why they had to hinder TK's with that.

Tomb Guard annoy me. The Killing Blow is awesome. Don't get me wrong and I think it's often overlooked as to just how good it can be, but 1 attack at WS3 and initiative 3?? It just stops them from being a great unit. To make them great we have to put in characters and they are too easy to kill in combat. Any opponent worth their salt will kill the Necrotect and Prince. I use the Armour of Destiny and Talisman of Preservation to assist them, but then what about my Hierophant and the other Prince on the Chariot?

However....

There is something that keeps me coming back to Tomb Kings. I also have Ogres and they are always being praised as having the best book, yet they do not interest me or excite me as much as Tomb Kings. Maybe part of that is the way everyone is hating on TK's. It's the rebel in me that goes against the grain.

I do think Sleboda needs to get a new army. I have said this several times and I just don't know why you keep playing TK's fella. Really I don't. Maybe you, like me, just have a big old soft spot for this supposedly rubbish army.

I have all the armies.

Tomb Kings is just my favorite one. I love the models, the Egyptian theme, the splendor...I just love 'em! The great weapon Ushabti are my favorite models of all time. I have something like 25-30 of them. The old book was a case study for perfect design - difficult to master, unique in style yet working within the system (pre-8th), fair, balanced, fun...it was great (it had some really dumb magic items, but hey).

The new one still has beautiful models (love the sphinxes and stalkers!), but fails so utterly on the table that I have, indeed, quit playing them.

=> Oh, I agree with that totally. My issue is the disconnect. When Cruddace pimped the book, he talked about the sheer immunity to all but a direct cannon shot to the face. This tells me he _thought_ he was designing a very resilient model by giving it T8. The truth is, as you allude to, it's no more resilient to 'little stuff' than anything T5 or better. T8 really, truly, doesn't mean much, even if the author _thinks_ it does (he really seems to have overlooked the change to the T chart). If he wanted it to be so resilient, he needed to find another way to do it.

=> Yes, it can. It can get back all its wounds, each and every turn, at a rate of two wounds per casting.

ah but T8 does make you "resilient to all but the great cannon" well at least more resilient then a terrorgeist once we get to the STR5 - STR6 area (think swordmasters, grave guard with great weapons, ironguts you know all those common units you see all over the place.) it is here that our constructs do show that T8 is far superior to T6 with 2 more wounds ala terrorgeist. Since these units will still be wounding us on 6's not the 5's or 4's needed to wound T6 monsters. It is only once you hit the STR10 mark that the sphinx and dragon equal out again on a 2+ to wound. (even when we don't even talk about different sized bases...)

So T8 DOES mean an awful lot when you look at the STR5-6 bracket, and quite nice in the STR 7-9 bracket, but nothing in the STr1-4 +10 brackets. So even bolt throwers will think twice about trying to pin-cushion a sphinx but prob wouldn't even blink against a terrorgeist or dragon.

will double check the VC book got stashed away before commentating on them getting wounds back.

I have all the armies.

Tomb Kings is just my favorite one. I love the models, the Egyptian theme, the splendor...I just love 'em! The great weapon Ushabti are my favorite models of all time. I have something like 25-30 of them. The old book was a case study for perfect design - difficult to master, unique in style yet working within the system (pre-8th), fair, balanced, fun...it was great (it had some really dumb magic items, but hey).

The new one still has beautiful models (love the sphinxes and stalkers!), but fails so utterly on the table that I have, indeed, quit playing them.

Well that is a shame you feel that way. I got absolutely battered the other day by Lizardmen and questioned the quality of Tomb Kings almost immediately, but looking back at the battle, I had some bad luck and the list was experimental ( 2 Warsphinxes and 1 Necro against an army that had a boat load of poisoned shooting didn't help).

One other thing that bothers me a little, is the shooting. Most people seem to rave about the 'always hitting on a 5" but I don't find that to be really that great. Am I Missing something? Couple that with the fact that arrows are only strength 3 so you're either wounding on 4, 5 or 6 and then the opponent will get their armour save, I usually end up only killing a handful at best.

So I feel that I kind of have to take Khalida to make them worthwhile which I don't like doing. Is it better to have MSU of archers?

Regarding hitting on 5+

If your just sitting there, 5+ sucks. But suppose you have to move. OR your oppoenent is long range. Or cover. Skirmish. Nurgled?

The enemy skirms are sneaking thru the forest?
Great! :-)
Your behind hard cover? Long range? I had to move?
Great!

Your standing in front of me? Not soo good... Course at that point you have bigger problems ...!

When I was calling double shot! Long range at your nurgle guys! after matching toward him he was not liking them soo much.

But, they all have their uses; finding what to use which units against helps.

J

I can understand that perspective.
For me, though, it's rarely those units that are giving my sphinxes a hard time.
It's the bows, xbows, fireballs, handguns, etc that are killing my beast before it ever gets there.

One very simple solution to the construct/T8 issue would have been to give them all 2+ armor saves. This would have matched the author's design vision of letting them shrug off smaller attacks while having them still be cautious of higher S attacks.

Also, I'm savvy enough to try (try!) to match strength vs weakness. I won't send my T6 beasts against enemy S6+ units. I hurl them at clanrats, swordsmen, etc. Things that are high S tend yo be fewer in number, so you don't need to counter them with a monster. A few shots/spells/impact hits will do the job.

With how the sphinx is currently, it fails equally against low and high S attacks.

=> I don't quit the army lightly. Trust me, over my 25+ years of playing this damn game (much love!) I've had my share of craptastic losses. I've _never_ quit an army, especially one I love so much, until now. Losses don't make me quit. A consistently demonstrated and reinforced sense of hopelessness does.

=> Amen. One third of our shots hit and generally one third of those cause a wound. Nine bowmen are needed to do a wound. 54pts per wound? No thanks. They are only good _in comparison_ to our non-shooting skeletons. Even then, I think the best way to use them is to take a few small units to do the things that Scarab Lord suggests - take out those few hard-to-hit targets. In other situations, against other targets, our archery really is nothing special. Handguns and crossbows are higher S. Wood elves are just plain better (as they should be). Repeating Xbows are always able to shoot twice and are on much better fighters. We get S3 shots with no AP mod. I'm glad to have them available to me, and I don't think they are miserable, but I agree that I don't see the uber in them that some do.


@Veritas (below)
You are totally correct about Watchtower. I love using them for that and should have mentioned that. Shame on me.

@Wollfe (further below) and Abaddun (even further)
Those comments made me laugh!

TK shooting is great for scenarios...that people refuse to play.

For instance, in the Watchtower scenario, you stay out of it and let an enemy unit hold it, then continuously pepper the crap out of them with 5+ to-hit arrows (or Stalkers are awesome too!). They'll die, then you move in like the dirty little hermit crab you are.

T8 is only a protection against few attacks with low strength (3, so you actually get a bloody save). 8th edition warhammer encourages lots of attacks with high strength, completely negating its defensive characteristics. For instance, fighting anything with strength 4 already reduces your save to basically nothing. Chaos warriors, a popular unit, will generally have 13-17 attacks or more. With hitting and wounding, they'll produce an average of 1.4 to 2.8 wounds. In return, (not factoring in a ward save, much less a boosted one), the necrosphinx would get an average of 2.8 wounds...and then lose combat because of the static +3 or 4 the warriors get. The obvious tactic is then to not engage warriors at all! Except for some armies, that's all there is. Lizardmen, Dwarves, VC, and other armies have similar units (slightly crappier, but still tough).

If I were to instigate any changes, it'd be the following:

- Sphinxes can heal once per augment. This is simply so well-known it doesn't need explanation.
- Stalkers take a single wound from Misfires, not D3. Sure I'll take the hits...but D3 can be horribly crippling, especially as I'll only ever regain 1 per turn, and that's if I'm even close to a caster.
- If the Hierophant dies, then as long as you have another Nehek caster you don't crumble. It's so obvious that the reason the VC book has this ability is that they want players to use the army lore over the book lores. This was a failure with the TK book and is easily implementable.
- Some point reductions; alternatively, some stat restoring to the old book. Scorpions and Ushtabi, specifically.Arbitrary stat and ability nerfing for increased points? wtf?
- 3+ armor save for constructs or immunity to poison. Shooting crossbows at a giant stone statue should do absolutely jack. It should be awfully similar to shooting at a stank...which is T10 with a 1+. A statue is obviously a little more fragile, so T8 with a 3+ is perfectly acceptable. Alternatively, how the heck does poison even wound stone? One of these two abilities would justify the point cost.


That's all I feel is really badly done. The rest I can live with, but these just seem unforgivable failures.

That being said, I still roll with the TK. Never give up! Never surrender!

I like sleboda, but Why_ does_____itfeellike___William Shatner___istalking_When__ever__I___readapost____ofhis.

I think a lot of people are caught up with comparing our army with another. Maybe it would be more useful to look at TK from within itself.

Grave guard are not a direct counterpart to tomb guard. I think the discussion would be better if we ignored comparisons to other armies and looked at what could be fixed so that it would make more sense to take in competitive lists. Using ushabti can make sense sometimes but only healing one wound per magic phase makes them much less appealing to me than similarly price/performance TG. Suggestions for boosting ushabti to make more upside to take makes sense when viewed from within our own rules.

Am I making sense? iPhone+forums make it hard to review.

I wonder if we can channel all of Sleboda's disappointment into a Email so potent, that when Robin Cruddace receives and opens the document, it will drain all the joy and love out of his body, though his face.

while we are still on Emails, surly if we can unite the tomb king players of the world and drown GW in disappointment, they must take the hint.

@tr1pod: Honestly, that's what I'm seeing, but then again the Minecraft community may have poisoned any positivity I see in defensive comments, so who knows!

@Abaddun: Exactly, but it can't be spamming, it'd have to be a definitive (mostly) list of what needs changing why it needs changing, and some compromises that could be made. And lots of luck.

Thanks you've further ruined sleboda from me.


And to those complaing about poison remember back to the old necron Codex where it said that necrons can still be affected by poison even though they're robots, and just assume that the enemy recognizes their foe before hand and uses acids and such accordingly. I just imagine its acids and chit eating through to the magical animus that drives the kitty onward.


I just wish that he herald had a special rule called like master of horse where he could give horseback units only his ws of 4 when he joined. And that he and the liche priests steeds benefited from scout/ vanguard/ fastcav when they joined a unit.