Talk:Warhammer/Tactics/8th Edition/Legion of Azgorh

Drazhoath vs. generic Sorcerer-Prophets

Let's compare Drazhoath to various loadouts of a generic Level 4 Sorcerer-Prophet on Bale Taurus (starting at 525pts) to properly asses his worth. --Jasko (talk) 15:22, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

In general: Drazhoath brings a particular set of skills to the table, a generic Sorcerer-Prophet cannot reach: Drazhoath has an improved profile (+1WS, +1W), he and every Chaos Dwarf unit in 12" get +1 to combat resolution, Cinderbreath has a S5 breath weapon instead of S4. On the other hand, Drazhoath does not have a Darkforged Weapon and a Sorcerer-Prophet can have the Blood of Hashut, which is pretty great. I would still consider all of his specialities a definite upgrade and easily worth almost the 45pts difference from the naked Sorcerer-Prophet.

• Spellcaster: Drazhoath receives a +1 to all his casting attempts. That's pretty big. If you want to have that for your generic Sorcerer-Prophet, you have to get the Book of Ashur, a common magic item from the rulebook, for 70pts. However, this item also grants +1 to dispel, whereas Drazhoath's Crucible will grant +2 to cast after he, or Cinderbreath, has killed their first wizard in close combat. The generic Sorcerer-Prophet also still has his Darkforged Weapon, so there is a 1/3 chance he will get an additional +1 to dispel attempts or +1 to channeling, further increasing his magic capabilities. You have however already spent 595pts, whereas Drazhoath only costs 570pts. The remaining 30pts magic item allowance can be spend on the Talisman of Endurance to give your Sorcerer-Prophet the same 5++ Ward Save Drazhoath enjoys.
  

Verdict: I still would go with Drazhoath. Offensively they are the same, with the generic Sorcerer-Prophet being better at counter-magic. But with all the other advantages Drazhoath has to offer, and at 55pts less, he is superior.

Objection: Drazhoath can only use the Lore of Hashut. While I would basically always advise to take that anyway, should you crave Metal, Death or even Fire, you obviously need a generic Sorcerer-Prophet.

• Tank: If you want a tough-as-nails Lord, and who doesn't, you have several possibilities for your Sorcerer-Prophet:
  

- Enchanted Shield + Talisman of Preservation: Giving you that sweet 1+/4++ and 50pts to spare for a magic weapon (Black Hammer of Hashut?) and/or arcane items (Earthing Rod?)

- Dragonhelm + Talisman of Preservation: 2+/4++(2++ against Fire) for 55pts. Be safe from Lore of Metal, but at a higher cost and with -1 Armour Save compared to the best possible one.

- Mask of the Furnace + Dawnstone: 2+/4++(2++ against Fire) like above, but with a re-rollable Armour Save for 90pts total. Doesn't leave much room for anything else, but is pretty tough.

- Armour of Destiny + Stone Mantle: You only have 4+/4++, but T6 (and I1) and only 15pts left.

Verdict: Drazhoath will always have one wound on the generic Sorcerer-Prophets, there is no magic item granting additional wounds. But his 3+/5++ leaves room for improvement, and when survivability is your main concern (and since that Bale Taurus is no good out of close combat), generic Sorcerer-Prophets are in the end superior.

• Killer: As discussed, it is very tough to get a Sorcerer-Prophet to be a proper killer in close combat. WS5 is not great (Drazhoath at least has WS6!) but at least it means he will always hit on 4+. The Darkforged Weapon is nice and 50% of abilities confer a bonus in close combat, but the Sorcerer-Prophet still is no killer.
  

- Giant Blade: +3S for 60pts, combine with Potion of Speed or Potion of Foolhardiness, leaves room for 5++ Ward Save.

- Black Hammer of Hashut: Actually pretty nice, better than Ogre Blade, can be combined with Tank-loadout.

Verdict: Unfortunately there are no magic weapons that miraculously turn a mediocre fighter into an Eversor Assassin. A Sorcerer-Prophet lacks it all: WS, S and A. You can increase or circumvent one, temporarily maybe two, but never all of them. Drazhoath comes with WS6 and a decent magic weapon. In the end, neither him nor the generic Sorcerer-Prophet will be a fearsome fighter.

Conclusion: Drazhoath is really not that bad, once you consider the alternatives. If you want a Sorcerer-Prophet on Bale Taurus, the only loadout I find superior is a tank-loadout with Black Hammer of Hashut. Your Sorcerer-Prophet will be tougher to kill (regardless of having one less wound) and bring more pain. He will however be an inferior caster, not grant +1 to combat resolution in 12" and only have a S4 breath weapon. You can save some points either by getting only a Great Taurus, but then you decrease your offensive potential, the one thing which drove you towards a Taurus in the first place, or by leaving the Sorcerer Prophet at Level 3, but come on, that's just a waste of a perfectly good Sorcerer-Prophet! Or take a Lammasu, use it less for close combat and more for being an additional caster and to move your Sorcerer-Prophet in the best possible position to burn his enemies to ashes (remember that you can cast spells even after marching).

Here's the problem: "If you want a Sorcerer-Prophet on Bale Taurus-" You should not want a Sorcerer Prophet on a Bale Taurus. Is Drazhoath better than a maxed out Sorcerer Prophet on a Bale Taurus? Yes, but that's really ignoring how you shouldn't be taking either (at least not in a competitive list). As you say they're mediocre fighters at best, and in fact having a Sorcerer on a Bale Taurus is the easiest way to get him killed since it exposes you either to the enemy's war machines, or their own characters on fliers who are happy to kick your shit in. In any case Drazhoath doesn't retroactively become a good choice just because a similar choice to him is a slightly more terrible idea. -- Triacom (talk) 16:31, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Well yes, hence that big "if". But I still think it has some merit to have a flying Sorcerer-Prophet nonetheless, not the least for that damn Purple Sun. And the only other option is the Arabyan Carpet for 50pts, that leaves a character vulnerable! Sure thing a character on a flying monster is a nice target for enemy war machines, but it's not like Chaos Dwarfs don't have their own ones to counter those or to threaten enemy fliers themselves. I play Dwarfs myself, there are just these days where you miss with your cannon and next turn that Chimera is among your troops, burning Hammerers to ashes left and right. --Jasko (talk) 22:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

There's value in a flying sorcerer, but not for the Bale Taurus' points. The Arabyan carpet might make him vulnerable, but it's honestly not as vulnerable as the Bale Taurus because it's easier to fit him in with the enemy units (and your units) and out of their frontal arcs (bonus points if you're in a spot that cannot be charged by an enemy character because there's no room, or use him to block a steam tank from pivoting). Now I'm a diehard Dwarfs and Chaos Dwarfs player (they were the first two armies I got into) and while you're right in that sometimes your cannons just don't work out for you, and you're right in that the Chaos Dwarfs have siege machines that can deal serious damage to enemy monsters, there's one big issue: they're nowhere near as good with it as the Empire (my third army) or the Dwarfs are. The Chaos Dwarfs are a lot more inaccurate, since a Stone Thrower is never as good as a cannon for accuracy (and the Deathshrieker's BS sucks, it's way better at taking out infantry anyway). Don't count on using the Steam Cannonade, if it's close enough to shoot them it's because they're charging you and the Iron Daemon's in danger of getting its shit kicked in (speaking from experience on that) since it can't even stand and shoot. Let's also not forget all of your war machines are a shitload more expensive with the exception being the Deathshrieker, though even that's more expensive than a cannon if it's upgraded at all, and in return it can barely hit shit, needing 5's to hit a war machine (forget it if the enemy has any sort of cover). When making an army you have to really decide how much you're going to bet on your war machines, since you can't just lose something like a Dreadquake (or get it in combat) without really feeling it. Given all of this, it's going to be harder for you to deal with enemy flying monsters trying to kill your general if he's on a Bale Taurus compared to Empire and Dwarfs, and it's going to be far harder for you to win an artillery duel. You have fewer shots, fewer overall wounds and as a result you're going to lose your artillery a lot easier (Hellbound's T8 doesn't help against a Cannon's S10, and the extra wound only helps half the time).

As an extra note, let's not forget that the most common points played is 2000, and unless you're playing End Times you're not going to be bringing anyone on a Bale Taurus in most games, if anything the carpet should be mentioned just for that. Let's also not forget that unless you're playing above 2000 points you're not likely to bring a Dreadquake Mortar, since you're going to want a K'daai Destroyer and you can't fit both into your army at that points limit. Even if you go with the Dreadquake you can only get two after the mandatory Slave Ogre and Steam Carriage upgrades (assuming you have an Iron Daemon, which if you're getting two Dreadquake's you're likely getting your Iron Daemon). Hellbound should be the first option dropped for them in my opinion, they're too valuable to risk spend a turn doing nothing (also doesn't hurt that the ogre gives it more wounds) and not getting hit is better than getting shot and being wounded on 6's, since the majority of ranged weapons are going to wound you on 6's regardless. Against a unit of let's say, BS3 shooters, you go from taking just over 1 wound on average from 20 (regardless of whether or not it's Hellbound), whereas if it's on a carriage it'll take 80 shooters on average to cause the same damage. -- Triacom (talk) 05:58, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

It's all certainly true. I'm full aware that a Sorcerer-Prophet is not an auto-include for the Legion of Azgorh or that you cannot just field one and can reasonably expect it to do a lot of damage like, I don't know, a High Elf Lord on Star Dragon. Yes, especially cannons are a great danger! But let's not forget: Including the Legion of Azgorh, there are 16 armies for Warhammer Fantasy. A grand total of 3 have cannon, and that's already including that weird Skullcannon of Khorne. A Bale Taurus has a 66% chance of (barely) surviving a (read: one) direct hit by a cannon. Drazhoath himself has a 50% chance of suriving an unsaved (!) wound, a generic Sorcerer-Prophet only has 33% chance but can have 4++. Playing a flying monster requires clever positioning and making use of LoS blocking terrain. As I said, I'm well aware of the limitations, but it's not impossible to successfully field a Sorcerer-Prophet of Bale Taurus. In a 2500pts game, obviously (coincidentally 625pts Lords allowance is exactly the price for a Level 4 Sorcerer-Prophet on Bale Taurus with 100pts magic items). --Jasko (talk) 11:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

5 factions have cannons (not including Chaos Dwarfs, since they don't have proper cannons), you're likely forgetting Ogre Kingdoms and Skaven, though granted the Skaven one likely isn't going to really be a threat while the Ogre one certainly is. Even when they don't have a cannon they have massed shooting (normally not very effective, but when things are as expensive as these ones are it can definitely be worth it) or they'll have magic, your war machines look great until they fall into the pit of shades or a Lore of Metal wizard decides he doesn't like your Iron Daemon being on the table. As mentioned they can also have their own monsters, virtually guaranteed to cost less than your Iron Daemon while being able to kick its shit in and if they don't have those they'll have war machine hunters, units of flyers or in rarer cases, units that pop up in the back like Skaven Gutter Runners. Every army in the game has some way of tying you down or eliminating your machines while unfortunately you don't have that same luxury. Having the Lore of Shadows taken away from them (Chaos Dwarfs could use it in the Ravening Hordes book) really hurts in a number of ways.

Now for your monsters, a Bale Taurus can survive a cannonball but there's a major problem afterwards: It's Initiative 3, and now it's wounded (likely pretty badly). If you charge a unit with it afterwards, or if it just gets shot afterwards, it's pretty much dead since even the Empire (any core unit hoarded up) are likely to cause a wound on it, so that it dies before even being able to make its Thunderstomps. If you're up against Skaven, Elves or anything with Initiative higher than 3, or any cavalry of any kind that decide to charge it afterwards then it and its rider are definitely fucked (yes you can use its breath weapon to try and help in the fight, but even if you cause more wounds on blocks they're going to be steadfast while the Cavalry are going to cost less).

Now a special note for terrain, and one of the reasons I fucking hate 8th edition with a passion (doesn't mean I don't love the armies in it, I just hate the core rules) is that when you say "LoS blocking terrain" you're talking about massive buildings right? I ask this because there's nothing else the monster can hide behind. Hills? It's too big, it can only claim soft cover at absolute best (if you're using a custom hill and only then if your opponent is very generous and their shooters aren't on a hill). Forests? They don't block line of Sight, landing in a forest requires you to take 2 dangerous terrain checks at minimum unless you feel like walking in and walking out, while also only offering soft cover at absolute best. If you're up against any army with a cannon you're going to be screwed because they're going to be spread out (unless your opponent's an idiot) so that you can't hide from everything, and forests certainly don't help in that aspect. Even against stuff like Tomb Kings and Elves you're going to take a lot of wounds, since they can likely shoot you with something no matter where you try to go (if you're up against the poisoned Tomb King Horde then you're definitely screwed), and a lot of armies with Cavalry can just charge you no matter where you are (granted they're not going to be doing it without wounding you first with something else). The changes to LoS also make you a lot more vulnerable to various magic attacks, since enemy wizards can just pick you out regardless of how many forests are between you and the caster. Making proper use of a monster used to require a great deal of terrain use, however since 8th that went away and as a result, a lot of monsters saw light to massive price cuts (which is why we have the 160 point Hydra bullshit).

Finally, I'm not saying it's impossible to field them, I'm saying that it's not as good an idea as not fielding them and going with something else. You can still do it if you want, but getting back to my earlier point, just because Drazhoath outperforms a bad choice doesn't make him a good choice, it just means that he's the lesser of two bad options. -- Triacom (talk) 21:21, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

It's all good, you're right with your points. Every army has something for the job, any job, that's what I like about the game. And I don't play on tournaments, I like to play different lists and basically field everything at one point. Oh, and I should add, actually should have from the beginning, me and my regular opponent decided from the start that 8th LoS rules are bogus. When we play, forests block line of sight, you can only see the first 2" (in and out, obviously). Shooting through a forest is insane, I really don't know why they did that. --Jasko (talk) 23:13, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, but the tactics page should still add that both are sub-optimal choices since neither's really in your best interest if you want to win. I play fun lists too (I don't find easy wins fun or satisfying, and it's one of the reasons I loved the Ravening Hordes Chaos Dwarfs, forget about easy wins there) and both myself and a friend tried playing 8th for years (both the regular rules and adding house rules to try and make it better) before we finally said "fuck this" and went back to mostly 7th. The only thing we kept from 8th was the option to use 8th edition rulebooks, the caster's wizard level adding a bonus to their casting roll, and the ability to choose 8th edition spell lores (with the exceptions being you cannot choose Lore of Life, and if you get Purple Sun you need to re-roll the result). I honestly can't think of anything else that I enjoyed in 8th more than 7th, no difficult terrain is a close one, but my friend and I just houserule that difficult terrain exists, with the only penalty being a dangerous terrain check if you march/charge through it instead of halving your movement and that problem's also solved. -- Triacom (talk) 00:17, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

I think it is quite clear on the tactics-page that neither a regular Sorcerer-Prophet on Bale Taurus nor Drazhoath are top-tier choices for competitive lists, not the least in the extensive Flame, Smoke and Ash Tactics part by DLoAF. The unit analysis of named characters should provide a comparison to their respective generic characters, as I think it is done also with the other armies. I'm going to add the disclaimer-notes, which other Tactics pages feature. --Jasko (talk) 10:14, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Here's the problem, one section says he's not a bad choice, which he is (just not as bad of a choice), and another section insinuates that he's pointless. Both of these are wrong for the reasons we've both gone over, there's merit to a flying caster but not when they're this high in cost, you can't screen them, and their fighting ability is mediocre at best. This is why in every other tactics section it talks about why having a dual melee/casting lord doesn't work whenever they show up, barring the End Times characters (who you can make a case for either way). -- Triacom (talk) 19:25, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Alright, I hear you, I have edited the Drazhoath analysis, I think it is very clear now. I think you agree that the tactics page should not be netlisting and basically recommend the one maxed-out list to field. Together with this whole discussion we were having here, I think the pros and cons for the various loadouts are well characterized. --Jasko (talk) 13:01, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Iron Daemon Movement

As per Forgeworld e-mail replies, it can rotate (like 40k fliers) and then move. Hope it gets added in the FAQs soon.

It obviously didn't and won't now. But I think it's pretty clearly worded anyway: An Iron Daemon moves 6" normally, for me that includes a wheel. It should even include moving sideways or backwards, like chariots can also do! The "may not wheel" only applies when you're "engaging the steam boiler" and roll the additional 2D6 for marching/charging. However, since it is not a war machine, it cannot pivot in the shooting phase to face the enemy! The thing is, if it moves 6" normally and is not towing anything, it should be treated as a single model and therefore should be able to pivot as many times as it wants in the movement phase. So I would say the movement is really not a problem, either you move 6" freely with the bulk of the army, or you move faster but then cannot maneuver as nicely and therefore can only shoot straight ahead, most importantly. --Jasko (talk) 17:19, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

How to do Characteristic tests

I feel I should preemptively add this just in case somebody who has no clue about Characteristic tests tries to undo my edits. To pass a characteristic test, you need to roll equal to or under your characteristic. What does this mean? Well if a Prophet is testing, they fail only 1/6th of the time, not 2/3rds of the time, only 1/6th. Whoever was so scared of failing that they forgot all Sorcerer-prophets are T5 and not T4, so giving them something like the Stone Mantle will not help them pass this test in the slightest, and your chance of failing is so negligible that worrying about it is pointless. Take a Healing Potion if it really scares you since that way you'll be back at full Wounds, except you'll also be T6. -- Triacom (talk) 07:04, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

I gotta say, you're quite full of yourself. Yes, Sorcerer-Prophets start with T5, so their chance of failing an unmodified T-test is the same with or without stone mantle. Daemonsmiths however have T4, they would benefit from having T5. And maybe you should read up on spells like The Withering from the Lore of Shadows or Soulblight from the Lore of Death. Don't pretend toughness cannot be lowered. --Jasko (talk) 12:21, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm not pretending it cannot be lowered, however before I edited the page every mention of the test was about how scary it was for Sorcerer-prophets, not for Daemonsmiths. Also nobody is going to be lowering your Toughness temporarily in the hopes that you get a miscast in that one specific turn where you're weakened. Even if they do, you can just have them leave the unit they're in before they cast (or just cast with somebody beside that Daemonsmith) and the problem's solved. -- Triacom (talk) 13:38, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Doesn't have to be the primary idea of the spell to make miscasts worse, but it could be a welcome bonus. Lowering toughness is great against (Chaos) Dwarfs in its own right, if it also makes the opponent think twice before casting a spell, even better. Sure you can leave the unit or use another wizard, or you dispel the spell, but Warhammer is all about making your opponent do what you want, not what he wants. Making you not use your Daemonsmith for one turn or make him leave his protecting unit or making you use valuable power dice for a dispel might be exactly what is needed for the win. Basically all I am trying to say is even if you were right with the changes, maybe try making them without calling other people idiots. --Jasko (talk) 14:36, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

I get what you're saying, but whenever your Sorcerer-prophet's hit by a toughness reducing spell or your Daemonsmith is, then it's still very easy to deal with. You either have them leave the unit they're in, or you just don't cast with them. Given that Sorcerer-prophet's are almost always in a Dwarf bunker and Daemonsmiths are either in a bunker or by their machines both of these are very easy to do. Daemonsmiths aren't useless if they can't cast, since they still channel and they still have their Infernal Engineer rule. You're also definitely going to have more than one spellcaster since you'll have either a Sorcerer-prophet and a Daemonsmith or multiple Daemonsmiths, so having one not cast while the other uses the dice isn't really that hard to do, especially if you're making liberal use of the chalice. I also think that if the opponent's win relied on making a Daemonsmith/Sorcerer-prophet miscast, or leave his unit then there's something off about your game plan. Also for the record the only person I was calling an idiot is the person who didn't know how Toughness tests worked yet put it into the article several times, to the point that they're recommending wasting nearly half of the Sorcerer-prophet's magic points on an item that won't benefit them against the effect they're worried about. -- Triacom (talk) 17:09, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Thoughts on Hobgoblin Hordes?

I've been wondering this for a while, but has anyone had success with Hobgoblin hordes? I've tried them but it seems like the Chaos Dwarfs have pretty bad synergy with them. I can't think of a good reason why you'd want to hold somebody in combat instead of messing up their charges and then shooting them after they deal with your Hobgoblins, and if you do try for a flank charge with somebody else you're either hitting a unit that you're going to take down without the Hobgoblins or they'll mitigate a good amount of the difference by killing Hobgoblins (it seems like it's just better to tank the first hit with Dwarfs then do Bull Centaurs or Wolf Riders in the flanks if you want flank charges). Even trying to hold up the elites of other armies who could easily take down your Dwarfs I find hard to justify because you could just shoot them before they become a real issue. -- Triacom (talk) 17:29, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

I think it's tricky and only works in a very limited setting. To take the maximum effect of a horde you would need to field them with shields, since the additional hand weapon anyway cannot be used from an additional rank, and you would need something like 50-60 at least. Even with a shield they will die rather quickly and their only real use is as a tarpit, so you need to be steadfast for at least 2 rounds, meaning 5-6 ranks to start with. If I had already 60 Hobgoblins, I'd give them also bows, since I'd get a lot of attacks with volley fire for only a little surcharge. So I would say a horde of 60 with shield, bow and full command for around 350pts, giving me at least two rounds of 40 bow shots plus a stand & shoot (most likely with the throwing knives) could work. Keeping them between 6" and 12" from the General, with a little luck I'd score a 6 on animosity which will turn those 40 bow shots into something actually dangerous. --Jasko (talk) 09:37, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

I think I can see that being a solid start, it's just that I'm not really sure where to go from there. I'll shoot a bit, get charged (likely anyway) and then... I really don't know. It's like I've got my opponent right where I don't want them by my own design. If they're using elite troops on them then I would've been much more comfortable with shooting them using my siege equipment and/or possibly sending the Destroyer at them, and if they're stock troops then I could've used Fireglaives or Great Weapons instead to kill them off quicker. Anything that I would've really liked to send into the flank to deal damage while using the Hobgoblins to negate steadfast is at risk because of how easily Hobgoblins die, so I could send K'daii Fireborn in there only for them to just start falling over dead thanks to both Burning Bright and Combat Resolution. I think Bull Centaurs could work, but that would end up making me a super-niche build. I'm doing the number crunching on how to make this sort of build work and it honestly seems like you'd need to outright drop the Sorcerer-Prophet since he ends up being too much of a points sink. You need to buy him, his gear, ideally make him Level 4 and then get him a Chaos Dwarf bunker to hide in which leads to roughly 25% of your points being used up now (even before the BSB and each of their gear), and he's not going to be able to use his Daemonsmith rule there, or be able to use several Hashut spells effectively (and you kinda really want Hatred and Ash Storm on him so you're probably getting Lore of Hashut) which means either getting siege machines or kitting him and the unit for close combat and now we've fallen right back into the standard Chaos Dwarf builds since we'll need to drop the horde idea to pay for machines and a Destroyer.

If we're to completely drop what the standard builds lists are and look at making a list for the standard 2000 points, what you can get is two blocks of 60 Hobgoblins kitted out with Bows and a Full Command, one unit of Bull Centaurs kitted out with Spears, Shields and a Full Command, and one Taur'ruk kitted out with armour and a shield. After this you can grab a Daemonsmith (level 2, General), a Castellan (BSB), a block of 20 Fireglaives/Great Weapons (to act as both a bunker and to hold the Standard of Discipline so the Daemonsith's Ld 10, you can also skip the Fireglaives/Great Weapons for more Bull Centaurs if you want) and then you'd still have enough points left over for a K'daii Destroyer and Naptha Bombs on the Daemonsmith and Deathmask, as well as a decent amount of magic items.

This makes for a very bizarre list, with the idea being that the Hobgoblins in front are to act as a cheap anvil while the Bull Centaurs and Destroyer are the hammers. Have both the Bull Centaurs and Destroyer support one Hobgoblin blob at a time and rely on the other one to hold until you can move around to it. You'll certainly have the bodies for opponents melee lists, but you'll be in trouble against a lot of magic bullshit (Dwellers Below, Purple Sun and Pit of Shades will cripple you, to name a few), and you'll be in a world of hurt against gunlines. If you're wondering why the list is focused so much around the hordes then that's because even though the Hobgoblins and Bull Centaurs only cost 527 for both units to act as a hammer+anvil style force, It's a tactic your opponent's going to see coming from a mile away, can be easily avoided or neutered (and it makes it hard to guard your own flanks past turn 2) and together they take away a lot of points that could otherwise be going towards something else, even if you were to buy expensive machines like both an Iron Daemon and a Hellcannon it would be 37 points cheaper and probably more effective (you could also get two Magma Cannons and two Deathshriekers).

This is why I said the army doesn't really have great synergy with Hobgoblin hordes. With most hordes in armies the hordes are the main goal and what you want to work around. Here though, you need a Chaos Dwarf character to be the General, then he needs a bunker to hide in and that's already a big drain on your points since he can't join the horde, especially since you'll probably want to give his bunker other equipment to make them somewhat useful during the fight. You also need another Chaos Dwarf to be the BSB which only takes up more points. There's so much tax you have to pay on Chaos Dwarfs that it really drains your potential resources for your hordes. -- Triacom (talk) 08:34, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

That's a valid breakdown. I think your earliest assessment was already on point, the army list is not really geared towards Hobgoblin hordes (even though it would fit thematically). If we had access to a Hobgoblin BSB and/or Taur'Ruk General, maybe it would be better. But anyway, it's not impossible. So for 2000 pts I would only go for one Hobgoblin horde, 60-80 strong, bows and shields, full command, no Khan. There is a sweetspot somewhere, where the unit (a) does pose a threat, (b) has lots of wounds while (c) being cheap enough that just killing it is no auto-win for your opponent. These 60-80 wounds with 40-50 bow shots are definitely something your opponent cannot ignore, and he has to hit it with something significant, they will just soak up some casual shooting attacks or so. A match only has 6 rounds and there only so many wounds an opponent can cause in that time. I would add a nice unit of Fireglaives and put a BSB Castellan in. A Daemonsmith as a General, staying back with a Dreadquake. This leaves room for Bull Centaurs, a Taur'Ruk and two units of Wolf Raiders. The remaining points can either be devided between the units and some equipment or include Fireborn. Strategywise that would yield the large horde in the center, flanked by the Fireglaives and the Bull Centaurs. Your opponent has to decide, either he focusses pretty much everything on the Hobgoblins, which lets your more killy units roam free, or he ignores the Hobgoblins but then probably has underestimated just how much damage they can do, especially when aided by animosity, Enchanted Blades of Aiban or Flaming Sword of Rhuin. Those Wolf Raiders obviously have to silence dangerous war machines etc, while the Dreadquake can either assist there or slow down some dangerous units.

I'm not going to pretend that something like this is the most powerful build for a Chaos Dwarf army, not by a long shot. So nothing for a tournament. But I think it is viable and can definitely catch an opponent off guard, when he is expecting a more classic Chaos Dwarf army. Or it at least poses a challenge for you to try new things. It's definitely fluffy, so would fit perfectly in narrative play within a campaign. If the list is up against a maxed out WAAC army, it's probably toast, sure thing there. --Jasko (talk) 10:50, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I think I could see that working, you could also get three units of 20 Fireglaives (standards, one with the Standard of Discipline), one Hobgoblin Horde kitted out, two Deathshrieker Rockets and two Dreadquake's, while being led by a Daemonsmith and Castellan BSB and still have 53 points left over for whichever magic items/upgrades you want. The idea being you could try forcing your opponent to face the horde directly since you can take out their warmachines (either with your own, or through Hobgoblin volume of fire since if they're hitting on 4's, or wounding on 5's through whatever means then they will kill a warmachine crew each round of shooting) and other backline units relatively easily. I can see why you'd want the Raiders and Bull Centaurs, but personally I'd rather get two more Deathshriekers and one more unit of Fireglaives over them in this list. The issue with this list though is it might not work on similarly sized (or greater) gunlines if the Deathshriekers keep missing, or if your opponent chooses the Lore of Life, but it might have a niche purpose if you're up against armies who can't choose it. If only the Chaos Dwarfs had a "Life is Cheap" rule for Greenskins this list would be so much better. -- Triacom (talk) 18:57, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Interesting! Yes, I think that might just work too. You definitely force your opponent into action this way. I would say the biggest threat would be lots of template weapons, especially those using the teardrop template. Ironically another Chaos Dwarf army would have the rights tools available. But also Skaven could be very challenging. But still, I think quite a few armies would be seriously challenged. But I think we might have found a use for a Hobgoblin horde here, now someone needs to try it out :) --Jasko (talk) 10:07, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

The lack of firing indirectly is not much of an issue since woods and other terrain that used to block line of sight no longer do, and if you bought the Steam Carriage or just have them on a hill then you can still easily draw line of sight anywhere past the horde. Even without either you can still argue that you can see past them since you can technically see bits of the enemy. -- Triacom (talk) 18:33, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Argh Damnit, me and my buddy are using our custom rules for so long now already, I sometimes forget they are not the actual rules. We play with the very old LoS rules: You need to be cavalry or taller to draw LoS over infantry, forests only allow 2" etc. You're right, with the official rules indirect fire is not an issue.--Jasko (talk) 10:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Rules like that are why I still play 7th, and why I made various updates for the Chaos Dwarf rules (not just Legion of Azgorh) tailored for 7th. I really don't like 8th, and would even go so far as to say I hate all of the core rules in comparison to 7th's, except for adding your wizard level to your casting total, most of the new spell lores (with exception to the Lore of Life which is bullshit, and the Purple Sun which is also bullshit) and magic items. I'll play 8th against anybody who doesn't want (or doesn't know how) to play 7th, but that's because I still find the game as a whole very fun, and the armies themselves can be pretty great to play as and against (with exception to all types of Elves). What solidified 8th as inferior to me though was seeing a 5-strong unit (and Full Command) of Savage Orc Boar Boy Big 'Uns charge into a 20-strong Skink Cohort (no Kroxigors, horde doesn't factor in since there's only two ranks, but they had a Champion), and see all of the Orcs die without inflicting a single casualty because the Skinks struck first. I'm not going to buy that a heavy cavalry charge, since there's no way giant boars are light cavalry, is going to hit an enemy, come to a dead stop, then all get killed while causing no harm because their opponent is a little faster than them normally. I also saw that time and time again with Bretonnia, Empire and Chaos to the point where everyone was treating cavalry as a joke, and when I saw that it was so ineffective as to be this laughable I could no longer take any of these rules seriously. By the way, that wasn't even an overly lucky roll either, that's actually what the average is! On average a 20-strong skink cohort is going to cause that much damage and kill them before they can attack. What a joke. At least in 7th while they would've taken casualties from Stand and Shoot they also wouldn't have lost combat, let alone all die before they could strike. -- Triacom (talk) 12:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I had a bit of an epiphany while I was at work today, and that was how Chaos Dwarfs actually can try to shoot into combat. While the rules state that you cannot intentionally fire at or into a unit engaged with your own troops, there's nothing that says you cannot aim a Deathshrieker Rocket slightly past them, and then use either regular scatter or the Deathshrieker's special extra move rule to have it zoom straight into an enemy unit, since this warmachine is one of the few who can intentionally try to kill your own units too. I'm also only suggesting Deathshriekers because they can be a lot more accurate than your other artillery pieces. In summation, if you were to try this you could have the Hobgoblin unit hole up in front, and continuously drop Deathshrieker Rockets from behind, cutting down large infantry blocks that are helpless to do anything about it. This tactic might be much better in 3000 point games though, where you can buy 6 Deathshriekers instead of just 3 (as well as another horde or two). -- Triacom (talk) 04:46, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Sure thing, aiming outside close combat with a scatter weapon and hoping to hit the units in the melee is possible, and war machines like the Deathshrieker or Doom Diver Catapults actually make it viable. It's a shame that the Deathshrieker cannot be fired indirectly, it could help with this plan. I'm not so sure about the 3000pts though, it always goes both ways, and in a 3000pts match you could face threats like 4 Helblasters and 1 Steam Tank, things that can easily take down a horde in one round. --Jasko (talk) 10:07, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Ideally with 3000 points you'd have more than one horde and more siege machines. Hordes can live through one round of shooting against Hellblasters and ideally by the second your own machines should've cut them down to size, especially since your own Dreadquakes mess up theirs pretty badly. A Lore of Metals Daemonsmith (or two) will also solve that Steam Tank issue for you. -- Triacom (talk) 18:27, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Probably true. I'm sometimes hesitant to try out rather experimental builds with 3000pts because one can potentially face really strong lists (the Helblasters and Steam Tank were you the first things which came to mind). Anyway. And I have to say it occured to me just how deadly the Flaming Sword of Rhuin can be on the horde - if you combine it with Ash Storm. 40-50 shots which wound on 5+ and have Multiple Wounds (2) are enough to kill even the toughest monsters etc. I always regarded Metal and Death as the better lores for Chaos Dwarfs, but that spell together with Ash Storm can be truly terrifying. Also on Fireglaives and Blunderbusses. So yeah, I think a Sorcerer-Prophets needs to be back in. I have to admit, the whole plan with the Hobgoblin horde is growing on me.--Jasko (talk) 10:14, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

You could afford the extra Sorcerer-Prophet with the increase to 3,000 points, it'll be a pretty big gamble trying to get those particular spells though (it really sucks when you miss Ash Storm in general and here especially so). If you can manage to get them then I can definitely see it working out. -- Triacom (talk) 10:42, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. I also don't like battleplans which rely on a very specific combination of spells. But this is just so juicy. I wouldn't worry too much about the Ash Storm though, with a Level 4 the chances of scoring it directly (or a double to pick it) are quite high, I'd be more worried about getting the Flaming Sword of Rhuin with a level 2 (at best).--Jasko (talk) 10:49, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm not really worried about that personally, it's easy to get two or even three Daemonsmiths who have little to no upgrades to ensure you get it. Simply roll for their spells until you get it, then if you have one or two who didn't need to roll for the Lore of Fire, have them roll on the Lore of Metal or Death. It's technically legal to do that, just a faux pas that the rulebook tries to shame you for. I'm still more worried about missing Ash Storm since taking two Sorcerer-Prophets for the same Lore isn't economic. You're only going to use one and then a Daemonsmith when you're casting, and the other Sorcerer-Prophet isn't likely to save you if the first one, with the spells you really want, goes down. On top of that they're going to need their own bunker, their own gear, etc. -- Triacom (talk) 12:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Nah, that doesn't fly with me or my buddy. You have to pick the lore when making the army list, just like you pick any equipment etc, no changes when you learn what army you're up against or if you already have that one spell you wanted. And that is also how the rulebook wants it (page 490). About the Sorcerer-Prophet, I think there was a misunderstanding, I'm not suggesting to get two, I meant that you can pick Ash Storm as soon as you have any double on your rolls. And the chance for a 4d6 roll without a four or any double is low enough for me to risk it.--Jasko (talk) 12:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

The reason the rulebook treats it as a faux pas ("if you haven't, shame on you. Go back, choose now and remember to do it properly for your next game") is because in previous editions you were allowed to choose whichever Lore you wanted before the battle started, not when you made your army list. That way you wouldn't be screwed in a tournament setting if you had your list written up using a Lore of Metals user and then found yourself facing off against somebody like Orcs and Goblins or Wood Elves. Of course in those editions more than the signature spell could be known by more than one wizard, so it was a lot less stupid. I do get what you're saying on the Sorcerer-Prophet, I'm just saying that if you only have one and you don't roll Ash Storm, you're looking at a very uphill battle, that's why I'm more worried about it since it's easier to game the system with Daemonsmiths (even if all 3 pick Lore of Fire) than it is to roll up Ash Storm, at least in my opinion. I suppose if all else fails just tell your opponent you're playing with Khaine magic and then they can't do anything about it. -- Triacom (talk) 13:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Well yeah, but in this edition you chose your lore when making the army list (therefore "do it properly for your next game". First time is a faux-pas, after that the rules want you to pick the lore beforehand, I couldn't just ignore that), so that's how we play it. And unlike the LoS rules, that is OK for us. My buddy plays Warriors of Chaos, Empire and Wood Elves, so Lore of Metal is always something between fantastic and pretty awful for me, that's just how it is. And with the Sorcerer-Prophet it's just how it is as well, you're absolutely right that getting two is not economical, at least not below 4000pts or whatever. So there is no other way anyway, roll 4D6, throw a Hobgoblin in the sacrificial pits and hope for Ash Storm.--Jasko (talk) 13:13, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I like how you're a stickler for ruling out a faux pas, but keep in old edition Line of Sight rules that aren't in 8th edition. You can't exactly say "but in this edition you chose your lore when making the army list, so that's how we play it" when you're also doing what the rules don't want you to do. Either you're playing with house rules to make the game better or you're not, at least that's my take on it. If you're using house rules, just generate the spells one at a time to make the game a little more fair, so that you're not screwed by something you wouldn't have known was going to come up, but if you're not house ruling it then take 3 Daemonsmiths with the Lore of Fire to guarantee you get it. -- Triacom (talk) 13:22, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Well we're using custom rules for cases where we just agree that the official rules make no sense. Like shooting through a forest. But if a Fire Wizard joins an army for battle, he cannot just use the Lore of Metal when he is facing Warriors of Chaos. Sure, this is most prominent in Empire wizards while it would be conceivable that a High Elf wizard is powerful enough to switch on the spot, but thas needs to be common ground. And I stand by it that the rulebook does state that you have to pick a lore when doing the army list. Page 490 (I know, which I quoted myself...) isn't even the correct part, look at page 29: "The choice of which lore each of your Wizard models know for a particular battle must be made when choosing your army, as explained on page 134." and there it says again "Although you won't generate the spells that your Wizards know until you start to play your game, you do need to make note in your army roster of which spell lore each of your Wizards will use." There is no wiggle room.--Jasko (talk) 13:36, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes a fire wizard joins an army for a battle, a battle. It wouldn't be very bright for the army to seek the help of a wizard who cannot be of much help to them and it wouldn't make much sense if a wizard was always be available no matter the situation (especially if they were killed in a previous battle). That's why previous rules gave you leeway with it, the Wizard at hand could easily be a different wizard since at no point in any previous rules does it specify what type of wizard you're hiring, you have to decide that yourself when it becomes pertinent. In the previous rules there was no indication that the wizard was switching whichever lore he studied on the spot so I'm not sure where you're getting that from. If we're arguing with this kind of logic though, I could easily say that the army knows there's a unit in/past the forest so therefore they can still shoot at them thanks to scouts either telling them who's there, wizards doing some pre-battle clairvoyance, or just seeing the unit move into the woods mid-battle. There is wiggle room with the wizard thing though because the rulebook specifically brings up a scenario where you can generate spells right before the battle if you "forgot" to do it before, if that wasn't there then I'd agree there was no wiggle room. -- Triacom (talk) 18:48, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Come on, those passages on pages 29 and 134 are crystal clear. I don't know why they put that sentence in the reference section, but to deduce from it that it is within the rules to pick the lore of wizards, not only just before battle, but even one after the other and first see which spells are generated goes too far. It's totally fine to play it like that, even better if it was like this in earlier editions, but it is clearly a custom house rule, like changes in LoS. But whatever, this discussion was about Hobgoblin hordes, and it was a very good one, let's not open further the next can of worms.--Jasko (talk) 19:36, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

That's not the reference section, that's the magic rules, personally I think doing it like that's a little more fair then forcing all wizards to know different spells for some fucking reason. Anyway I agree we should get back on topic. -- Triacom (talk) 19:48, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Reference section starts page 479 and includes the lores and magic items, so yeah, it is. At least with that there cannot be any ambiguity. And I understand why you’re doing it, I just don’t understand why you don’t want to admit that it is a purposeful deviation from the rules, especially if you don’t like 8th anyway and prefer 7th.--Jasko (talk) 07:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

How's it a reference if it's something that was never mentioned before? If it's something new, then by definition it cannot be a reference. I also never said it's something I've ever done in a game, since I haven't, I listed it as a technically legal option because for some reason that blurb in the magic section exists for players who "forgot" to write their lists 'properly'. In any case, to get back on topic I was thinking a bit more about this at work, and I think if you want to try your boosted horde strategy, you really need to be playing with Kkaine Magic. You can't really risk losing out on Power Dice when you need both Ash Storm and/or Flaming Sword, and Khaine Magic ensures that you get all three. At the very least it'll help mitigate a good deal of the random chance to help ensure the hordes work out for you, especially if you have more than one Daemonsmith since that means more than one Flaming Sword active at any time, and/or you could also add Enchanted Blades to a unit. Assuming you have both against a Flammable target, that means you're hitting on 4's long-ranged (3's short-ranged, and +1 for both if you get lucky with Animosity) wounding everything in the game that's T5 and higher on 4's, you're armour piercing and cause multiple wounds (2) so regardless of what they're up against (unless it's something with incredibly good armour like a Steam Tank), it should be pretty screwed. Even without Ash Storm, a group with that many shots can and will kill a Dragon if they're shooting short-ranged or long-ranged with an Animosity boost (long-ranged without still leads to 5 wounds on the non-flammable dragon though, assuming all shots hit him and not his rider). Of course Ash Storm will help make up for whatever combat losses they suffer and/or if they have to shoot at long range, and it'll also gaurantee they get the rider too. -- Triacom (talk) 10:05, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

What's Khaine Magic?--Jasko (talk) 10:31, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

End Times magic that supersedes the main rules and becomes mandatory to the game if one of the players wants to use it (the other player doesn't have the option of saying no). Basically what happens is you roll 4D6 instead of 2D6, the casting player gets all the dice for his power pool (there is no limit to the amount of dice in your pool) while the dispelling player gets the two highest numbers rolled. All Wizards know every spell in their lore and more than one Wizard can cast the same spell in the same phase, but Wizards with Loremaster get to re-roll attempts to cast a spell. Broken Concentration no longer exists, but instead before casting a spell you roll a D6, that's the maximum number of dice you can use to cast it. You do the same when you roll to dispel, representing how Magic's easier to access but more finicky/chaotic to use. There's also special End Times spells that cannot be dispelled if you successfully cast them (they're only available to Lord level Wizards, 3 and up), and the Lore of Fire End Times spell gives every enemy model the Flammable rule (personally I think Ash Storm is still a bit better since it is way easier to cast and has extra effects, but I can see going for that one). -- Triacom (talk) 10:43, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Ah, Curse of Khaine, End Times, got it. Sure those rules would help with the plan, but we usually don't play End Times. So I think I will eventually just try it with a Sorcerer-Prophet and two Daemonsmiths, metal and fire each. I might get everything, something or nothing, but I think the horde does enough damage naked as it is. Those boosts, even just one of them, would be great and can turn the unit into something terrifying, but if not then it's also fine. There's always the chance for animosity.--Jasko (talk) 11:21, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

You don't need to play End Times to use Khaine Magic, the rules are written so that they can be used separately from any other End Times rules or scenario. That's why I suggest using them, it's just to ensure you get every spell and can use the spells you want. -- Triacom (talk) 22:29, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Ah! Well anyway, for me that is all End Times. Same with the 50% Lords & Heroes allowance (we have a slightly different house rule there instead) and Lore of the Undeath, even though that made it's way into the rulebook FAQ. We ignore basically everything which was introduced as part of the End Times books. But I'll keep it in mind should an opportunity present itself.--Jasko (talk) 11:09, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

It's really not End Times, it's actually just the Storm of Magic rules with the wheel removed, some of the spells nerfed, all of the magic items and optional monsters removed (as well as allied army options) and then repackaged as something new, only now you don't need the permission of both players to use it. GW got lazy with that 'new release', but on the plus side it is a hell of a lot less clunky than Storm of Magic ever was, and it makes magic-heavy armies a lot more viable (so you don't have to concede when you roll snake-eyes in Turn 3) so that's also a plus. I'd at least recommend trying it out, to me it feels a bit better in general. -- Triacom (talk) 12:11, 18 July 2019 (UTC)