Warhammer 40k Fluff Discussion XVII: Call Necrosius, The Old Thread Is Dead!

[Grytorm]

The OVN lost factions mod adds Albion as a faction in itself.

Generally speaking the people of Albion really don't get along with the Norscans, except the Albionites who joined Be'lakor during his time spent as a corporeal being in the northern part of Albion. Norscans generally only visit Albion to raid on the rare occasions the mists protecting the isle part, and the natives almost never leave. On top of that the people of Albion hate Chaos and many Norscan tribes are corrupted to some extent.

I was thinking about Albion because they are geographically they are geographically near to Norsca, they are seperated from the main Norscan factions, and they are not totally disimilar from Norsca. And it is something they GW and the video game company are unlikely to develop.

Basically I think I started by brainstorming what sort of DLC could exist for Vampire Coast before crossing into what the vampirates could be set across from. Norsca seemed best because they could use more content, as seafarers they can be set against the Vampirates, and as they were fleshed out by CA there is more room to just make stuff up.

So for the Vampirate ideas I have had center on a waterlogged Strigoi king. Supporting him would be spellcasting Seawitch lords that would add Beast magic to the faction. Ghoulish castaways who fight with rusted cutlasses or firebombs. Degenerate sharklike strigoi vampire infantry as an alternate to Depth Guard. And a sharklike varghulf like creature called a Bilge Beast. I should probably come up with a ranged unit.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

Aw man, I know a guy who brainstormed and drew some FANTASTIC art for a hypothetical Albion faction! Even made them look like real ancient Britons and stuff!

Here's his DeviantArt gallery of WF stuff, he's made pics for other factions too and even drawn some of the old favorites!

[Avaris]

A bit of musing on approaches to canon and presenting a setting. TL:DR, recent publications, using the example of the Blood Angels codex, have done a fairly poor job of providing the basics of the setting as a ‘jumping off point’ that provides new players with sufficient context, without having to dig deeper and be exposed to the firehose of lore online.

I’m a big believer in the idea that the setting should be a jumping off point, rather than a thing that defines every single truth; people should be able to create their own narratives and change their personal interpretation of the setting where it suits them. As a non contentious example, my Blood Angels have black rims on their shoulder pads. Looking at the codex, these are no longer recognised as an ‘official’ scheme, but I chose it because I like how it looks. This is a minor change to the setting for my personal canon; there are more significant changes I have also made, most notably choosing to have female space marines in my armies, but I see these as different levels of the same thing. I know the canon, and I have taken it as a jumping off point, from which I am free to deviate for my own hobby.

The thing is, in order to feel confident doing so, you also need to have a good idea of where the ‘official’ line of canon is. I have been in this hobby, on and off, for over 20 years. The canon is ingrained, I know what is significant and what is a passing reference with no detail behind it. But not everyone has my depth of knowledge; newer players will be wholly reliant on current publications to get their understanding. Once they get into it, they can learn more through the various online wikis, but the books available to them should give them a suitable starting off point to tell them what is important in the setting, particularly through the lens of their chosen army.

Which brings me to the prompt for this post, the recent Blood Angels codex supplement. Having read through it, I think it utterly fails at delivering the right information for a new player to understand the place of that army in the setting. Being focussed on the Blood Angels, it should surely highlight the most recent events of significance to the chapter. But it doesn’t, not properly.

By way of example, throughout the book it makes reference to the attack of Hive Fleet Leviathan on Baal. Much of the background material talks about current actions taken in response to this attack, such as needing to ‘drive out the Tyranids of Hive Fleet Leviathan from the Red Scar’ or talking about which successors arrived in time. This is good, the timeline is evolving! But nowhere does it outright say what actually happened on Baal. As an invested player, I know that story beat, but I suspect these teasing references would be very frustrating and confusing to a newer player.

Worse still, it means that it is unclear what has more depth behind it and what is an open story point. The description of Dante mentions several campaigns from his lifetime, most of which have no detail behind them. These are great things to have as narrative hooks! But as written, I’m not sure there is any way a newer player would know those ones are just names they could choose to add detail to themselves, whereas the attack of Leviathan is a major story point.

So, to sum up, I’m frustrated with how the Blood Angeles supplement presents the lore. It focuses on the ‘current’ events in the timeline, without setting them in the ‘historic’ context. I believe this makes it difficult for newer players to engage with the lore as a jumping off point: it hints at a wider universe of lore, but makes it difficult to know where to look for more information. Which inevitably will lead to people trying to get that information from various online sources, which are best thought of as a firehose of information. Much better would be treating the codex as ‘here is what you NEED to know,’ then enabling people to dig further if they wish, or jump off into their own hobby from there.

Incidentally, perhaps part of this is having just read the ‘House of’ books for Necromunda. These do a very good job of presenting the background information for the houses, particularly through use of a timeline of the house history. I guess the above is all just a very long winded way of saying ‘there should be a timeline in the Blood Angels supplement’!

[Cheesegear]

A bit of musing on approaches to canon and presenting a setting. TL:DR, recent publications, using the example of the Blood Angels codex, have done a fairly poor job of providing the basics of the setting as a ‘jumping off point’ that provides new players with sufficient context, without having to dig deeper and be exposed to the firehose of lore online.

Blood Angels are a Chapter of Space Marines.
Their Primarch was a guy called Sanguinius. He had Wings - proper wings, that is - and could sort-of tell the future. He was killed by Horus. Then a dude called Raldoran took over.
Blood Angels like Jump Packs. Death Company are Blood Angels Space Marines that are reliving Sanguinius' death.

Except that's too much the second you decide that canon isn't important.
It's all true, or none of it is.

IÂ’m a big believer in the idea that the setting should be a jumping off point, rather than a thing that defines every single truth

You have the jumping off point.

As a non contentious example, my Blood Angels have black rims on their shoulder pads. Looking at the codex, these are no longer recognised as an ‘official’ scheme, but I chose it because I like how it looks.

Nice Angels Encarmine you've got there.

most notably choosing to have female space marines in my armies

REEEEEEEEE.
Let me tell you how to do your hobby real quick.

By way of example, throughout the book it makes reference to the attack of Hive Fleet Leviathan on Baal. Much of the background material talks about current actions taken in response to this attack, such as needing to ‘drive out the Tyranids of Hive Fleet Leviathan from the Red Scar’ or talking about which successors arrived in time. This is good, the timeline is evolving! But nowhere does it outright say what actually happened on Baal.

Maybe if you're interested, the idea is that you buy the novel Devastation of Baal?
Maybe it allows a space where you can make up what happened.
Maybe what happened on Baal that time with Tyranids and Ka'Bandha (yep, that one) was pretty complex and can't be distilled into a paragraph or two without taking up more space in the book.

As an invested player, I know that story beat, but I suspect these teasing references would be very frustrating and confusing to a newer player.

I suspect if you were to ask GW's social media team, they would point you towards Black Library and The Devastation of Baal, and encourage you to spend more money.

So, to sum up, I’m frustrated with how the Blood Angeles supplement presents the lore. It focuses on the ‘current’ events in the timeline, without setting them in the ‘historic’ context.

Nothing matters.

I believe this makes it difficult for newer players to engage with the lore as a jumping off point: it hints at a wider universe of lore, but makes it difficult to know where to look for more information. Which inevitably will lead to people trying to get that information from various online sources, which are best thought of as a firehose of information.

The problem is when you describe everything in detail, you start to get bogged down in details. Which makes it harder to write new things in the future, as grognards like me say "Wait, that's not what happened.", or "Wait, a Bolt is a caseless ammo type...", and then getting confused when that's not the case.

What side does an ex-Deathwatch service-Marine put his Deathwatch Honours on?
Does it matter? Or doesn't it matter?

Much better would be treating the codex as ‘here is what you NEED to know,’ then enabling people to dig further if they wish, or jump off into their own hobby from there.

Blood Angels are a Chapter of Space Marines. They live on Baal's Moons. Generally. Unless they don't. Maybe your dudes are a Company or two on Crusade, Baal is irrelavent. Blood Angels aren't even red. Umm...Due to your own circumstances they changed their armour's colours. Nothing actually matters. Do what you want.
Go.

I guess the above is all just a very long winded way of saying ‘there should be a timeline in the Blood Angels supplement’!

What do you need to know that for? Just make up whatever you want. What are you, some kind of Grognard?

[Avaris]

Maybe if you're interested, the idea is that you buy the novel Devastation of Baal?
Maybe it allows a space where you can make up what happened.
Maybe what happened on Baal that time with Tyranids and Ka'Bandha (yep, that one) was pretty complex and can't be distilled into a paragraph or two without taking up more space in the book.

The thing is, a lot of the stuff in the codex talks about the response to this clearly significant event, how it shaped the Blood Angels and their successors as they are now. But nowhere does it really say what it is, and that is something that is useful context for many things in the codex. The novel is a great place for more detail, but I feel the codex needs a precis of events.

A better way of explaining what I'm getting at: a major thing for 40k as a setting is 'unreliable narrator'. In theory, everything we know about the setting could be a lie. Imperial propaganda. There is no objective truth in the universe. Which leaves space for players to create their own interpretations. BUT it helps to know what you are reinterpreting: if I want to decide my captain fought in the Devastation of Baal, it would be nice to have a brief summary of why that matters in the codex. If I want, I can then go into detail with the novel. Or, I could take the key points already given and make my own spin on it. But when making that decision, it should be able to be a conscious decision; it's far better to be able to say 'I know what this said, and chose to ignore it because XYZ' than to be told 'oh, didn't you know about this?' and feel that you are unknowingly wrong.

Something like the Blood Angels supplement should be giving enough detail to know the major beats. From there, you can either read the novels and other material, or create your own spin. But the supplement as is is too much hinting and not enough actual detail on the events. It's a difficult balance!

Edit: to paraphrase Nick Fury, "I recognise the canon has made a decision, but as it's a stupid decision I've elected to ignore it." I want people to be informed enough that they feel able to ignore the canon where they want to. That's much better than someone feeling bad about a hobby decision they made which they later learn was 'incorrect'.

[LansXero]

As an invested player, I know that story beat, but I suspect these teasing references would be very frustrating and confusing to a newer player.

No? Like, at all? Like, have you ever just binged Lexicanum jumping from obscure reference to obscure reference like a dive on TVtropes? Or wondered what all those names and campaigns and things mentioned in DoW and other videogames are?

This is the internet era. Everything you need is hyperlinked and vlog'd a click away. You absolutely dont need anything beyond teasers, and being rewarded by doing a cursory search is a great way to hook people making them feel smart and 'in the know' because they can google. Keeping that tone mysterious but alluring is great, because it adds to the mysticism of the whole thing.

And then someone can just **** on the whole thing, take all that info and toss it away to go make something absurd in-setting like female space marines or corgis driving tau suits. Personally, I think asking to be presented with more info to disregard is a waste of time, but its not like the info isnt there anyways, its just split across several books because money.

[LeSwordfish]

No? Like, at all? Like, have you ever just binged Lexicanum jumping from obscure reference to obscure reference like a dive on TVtropes? Or wondered what all those names and campaigns and things mentioned in DoW and other videogames are?

This is the internet era. Everything you need is hyperlinked and vlog'd a click away. You absolutely dont need anything beyond teasers, and being rewarded by doing a cursory search is a great way to hook people making them feel smart and 'in the know' because they can google. Keeping that tone mysterious but alluring is great, because it adds to the mysticism of the whole thing.

And then someone can just **** on the whole thing, take all that info and toss it away to go make something absurd in-setting like female space marines or corgis driving tau suits. Personally, I think asking to be presented with more info to disregard is a waste of time, but its not like the info isnt there anyways, its just split across several books because money.

I think it's incompetent writing to write half a story and expect them to look the rest up on wikipedia.

[Thragka]

And I like books.

[Avaris]

No? Like, at all? Like, have you ever just binged Lexicanum jumping from obscure reference to obscure reference like a dive on TVtropes? Or wondered what all those names and campaigns and things mentioned in DoW and other videogames are?

This is the internet era. Everything you need is hyperlinked and vlog'd a click away. You absolutely dont need anything beyond teasers, and being rewarded by doing a cursory search is a great way to hook people making them feel smart and 'in the know' because they can google. Keeping that tone mysterious but alluring is great, because it adds to the mysticism of the whole thing.

Yes, it is good being able to go for a deep dive around obscure references. But the basics need to be there to encourage that: giving people enough to lure them in to that deep dive/extra novel etc. Having read the BA supplement, I don't think it hit the right level of that. It tells me that the BA really care about the Devastation of Baal, but doesn't give enough details of it to tell me why I, as a reader, should care enough to go out for a deep dive.

[Cheesegear]

This is the internet era. Everything you need is hyperlinked and vlog'd a click away.

Not necessarily.
What I want is usually found in actual book reviews on Reddit. Usually because I want what was said. Actual quotes. And I like seeing thought processes. I want to know about individuals that I want to read about.

The Assassination of Gabriel Seth.

Let's check Lexicanum real quick... It's not there.
Check WH40Kwiki... Not there either.

Huh. Let's go on WH40Kwiki and see if we can find the part where Graham McNeill uses Captain Agemman as a mouthpiece to chew out Matt Ward...Not there. That's weird.

1. Someone has to have the content.
2. The person who has the content, has to be willing to bother to rewrite or paraphrase it to a site.

If that doesn't happen, then the information isn't there. Let's see what happened during the Gehenna Campaign when Dante and The Silent King agreed to an alliance... Nevermind. That's not there. Not really.

Oddly, the only almost review I can find on Trial by Blood, is on 1d4chan.

You absolutely dont need anything beyond teasers...

Technically this is correct.
But once someone starts asking...

Spoiler

Show

but its not like the info isnt there anyways, its just split across several books because money.

This.
If you want an event that happened, read the Codex.
If you want to know how it went down, read a Wiki.
If you want to know what individuals said and did, read a novel.

[Avaris]

This.
If you want an event that happened, read the Codex.
If you want to know how it went down, read a Wiki.
If you want to know what individuals said and did, read a novel.

This is exactly it. My problem with the BA codex is it doesn't meet the first point enough. From reading it, you get various mentions of a conflict with Hive Fleet Leviathan, but not enough to pin down the actual event that happened. All it needs is a single specific entry reading something like 'In the years prior to the opening of the Cicatrix Maledictum, Baal came under threat from Hive Fleet Leviathan. Dante called on all sons of Sanguinious to defend their spiritual home, leading to many chapters fighting on Baal. But even that wasn't enough, and it seemed the angels faced extinction. Then, the great rift opened. The Hive Fleet in orbit was annihilated, but enough Tyranids remained that defeat was certain. Yet at the last, the skies open, and salvation arrived in the form of the Primarch Gulliman and the Indomitus Crusade.'

Then, if people want to read more, they can go to the wiki or the book, at which point they are shocked to learn of the involvement of the demons of Khorne!

[LansXero]

This.
If you want an event that happened, read the Codex.
If you want to know how it went down, read a Wiki.
If you want to know what individuals said and did, read a novel.

And of course, the reason why I dont get the problem with this, is arr arr matey and a bottle of rum ;)

So I guess its just one of those things I cant relate well to.

[Wraith]

Is this phenomenon so new that its surprising? I remember reading 2nd Edition Codices, wherein the 'teasers' to infamous battles weren't story-hooks, they were IC references to actual battles played by the playtesters that they particularly enjoyed and wanted to immortalise in print. No expanded story, no wiki, no follow-up novel - just "hey remember that time I had Dante fight your Carnifex and I rolled a bunch of 6's? That was cool, we should put it in the book!"

I honestly don't remember GW being any different. Then again, I've played Grey Knights for the longest time, and most of their book is "And then something psychic happened, which was weird, but they couldn't tell anyone because IT'S A SECRET!"

[Brookshw]

Then, if people want to read more, they can go to the wiki or the book, at which point they are shocked to learn of the involvement of the demons of Khorne!

Be nice if they'd footnote when events are covered in a particular book. Hello driving sales.

[Avaris]

Is this phenomenon so new that its surprising? I remember reading 2nd Edition Codices, wherein the 'teasers' to infamous battles weren't story-hooks, they were IC references to actual battles played by the playtesters that they particularly enjoyed and wanted to immortalise in print. No expanded story, no wiki, no follow-up novel - just "hey remember that time I had Dante fight your Carnifex and I rolled a bunch of 6's? That was cool, we should put it in the book!"

I honestly don't remember GW being any different. Then again, I've played Grey Knights for the longest time, and most of their book is "And then something psychic happened, which was weird, but they couldn't tell anyone because IT'S A SECRET!"

I think for me the difference is that they are now starting to actually advance the storyline, so there is a more definite idea of 'recent past' that players should have the chance to know about.

One of the things GW have said they want to do with AoS is for players to be able to feel they have played through specific eras of the setting's history. "Oh yeah, I played in the Soul Wars." I assume that they want similar for 40k. But there's a risk of leaving the newer players behind if they don't even provide the briefest idea of what the recent campaigns were: when someone says 'I played through the Soul Wars', the response should be 'oh, I've heard of that, tell me more' rather than 'what's that?' A little knowledge helps feed the curiosity!

[Platinius]

Belated Sanguinala short by Alfa, Enjoy!

[Silverraptor]

Belated Sanguinala short by Alfa, Enjoy!

Technically from Eliphas.

[Mystic Muse]

Very enjoyable nonetheless.

[Grytorm]

Stubbornly seeking meaning in life. Thus I shall post random things here once more.

I once read a summary of the story of the Warhammer Fantasy character Drachenfels. And I came up with a basic explanation for him supposedly cowing the Chaos gods. Basically the Chaos gods together would have easily defeated him but he was also somehow strong enough that in a 1v1 fight he could have at least injured any one of the gods which would have left whoever tried to fight him alone vulnerable to the other three. Then one of them thought to ask what he wanted of them. And Drachenfels request for an army to wage war upon the world was pretty much what the four were thinking of doing anyway so they kind of just decided to go along with it.

Then for Total War Warhammer ideas. I brainstormed what sort of unique mechanics could be added to extant Legendary Lords. For the three main Empire LLs I would give them a shared mechanic of some sort of mission to gain organizational support in the Empire. Karl Franz would be gaining the loyalty of knightly orders. Volkmar the Grim would be working to build a unified religious structure from the diverse imperial cults. And Balthasar Gelt would be busy demonstrating the superiority of Gold Magic to the other schools. Not certain of how it would work. Probably a set of quests started by owning certain territories with three stages. Each providing unique rewards.

Brettonia mechanic ideas. Alberic de Bordeleaux would have something a little like Grombrindal's legend thing themed around differing guilds/institutions. Louen Leoncouer could have something like Markus Wulfhart's Hunters. So Louen Leoncouer would gather his former companions the greatest knights of Brettonia under his banner. And Morgianna le Fey would could have something related to religious pilgrimages or get access to some more esoteric mystical units.

And for Dwarves I came up with the idea that Thorgrim Grudgebearer could recieve quests to resolve major ancestral grudges in a system a bit like the Norscan monster hunts. Ungrim Ironfist would get a martyrdom complex where he gets buffs from having to many outstanding grudges and weird mechanics related to getting himself wounded.

Lastly I tried to brainstorm units which could be added to Brettonia which is apparently not going to happen or something. Unfortunately mostly had ideas for infantry. Displaced peasant bandits who still are loyal to Bretonnia and their traditional lords. Just that they are somewhat estranged at the moment. Then some sort of urban infantry of uncertain quality. Because Bretonnia does have cities and weaving and guilds and stuff. Only thing I could think of to distinguish them would be better leadership because they have a group identity. Also some sort of shepherd unit because it seems like shepherds and whoever takes care of horses would have some distinction in Bretonnia. Also Questing Beasts maybe as a weird fragile cavalry hunting monster or something. Thinking of this it seems to me that Bretonnia is somewhat constrained. Like, there theme is King Arthur, medieval France and England, ponymen, Crecy, and trampling your own crossbowmen. But I think a lot of stuff that fits those don't really fit into the faction as is.

Also something I found funny. I was thinking about how you can play Total War Warhammer with armies themed around different Skaven clans and how not all factions can really do it. And then I started to think about Vampire Counts and how they have ghosts, ghouls, barrow wights and children of the night. And then I started to think about how those could have been expanded upon allowing for a variety of thematic undead armies. And then I remembered the Nighthaunts and the Flesh-eater Courts.

[snowblizz]

I once read a summary of the story of the Warhammer Fantasy character Drachenfels.

Drachenfels... yeah best forget about Drachenfels. The original books were written at a time when BL desperately was trying to start up by authors who knew nothing about the Warhammer world and were not interested in learning about or investing themselves in the background. Most of them did contract work not under their own name and with the specific understanding they do not have to adhere to Warhammer lore.

And I came up with a basic explanation for him supposedly cowing the Chaos gods.

Even in the book Drachenfels actively worships Chaos. In the most pedestrian slapdash way imaginable but still.

Lastly I tried to brainstorm units which could be added to Brettonia which is apparently not going to happen or something. Unfortunately mostly had ideas for infantry. Displaced peasant bandits who still are loyal to Bretonnia and their traditional lords. Just that they are somewhat estranged at the moment. Then some sort of urban infantry of uncertain quality. Because Bretonnia does have cities and weaving and guilds and stuff. Only thing I could think of to distinguish them would be better leadership because they have a group identity. Also some sort of shepherd unit because it seems like shepherds and whoever takes care of horses would have some distinction in Bretonnia. Also Questing Beasts maybe as a weird fragile cavalry hunting monster or something. Thinking of this it seems to me that Bretonnia is somewhat constrained. Like, there theme is King Arthur, medieval France and England, ponymen, Crecy, and trampling your own crossbowmen. But I think a lot of stuff that fits those don't really fit into the faction as is.

The problem is that by the time you have imported all parts of the mediaeval society into Bretonnia you end up with the Empire. This is why very specifically Bretonnia didn't have much of infantry presence, especially not one based around actual feudal cities and towns, because think ordered infantry with pike/halberds and crossbowmen...

Broadly speaking this also holds. When you start expanding a factions unit base you eventually end up in a place where everyone looks more or less the same. GW had the same problem with it's product-lines too in their never-ending quest to sell a shrinking player-base new stuff every month.

The later stage of the Warhammer game, before all that Age of Sigmar nonsense already saw a vast expansion of units filling most armies lists up well beyond their capacity to absorb thematically. Some of the army concepts are so slim that it is hard to meaningfully expand them too much.

Also something I found funny. I was thinking about how you can play Total War Warhammer with armies themed around different Skaven clans and how not all factions can really do it. And then I started to think about Vampire Counts and how they have ghosts, ghouls, barrow wights and children of the night. And then I started to think about how those could have been expanded upon allowing for a variety of thematic undead armies. And then I remembered the Nighthaunts and the Flesh-eater Courts.

Of the major Skaven clans only Eshin has trouble working on an army level. There was a series of articles in White Dwarf with expanded armylists based around the major clans. All this goes back to the narrowness of the theme "Vampire Counts" started out as "Undead" a concept broad enough it could be split into 2 large effectively separated thematic concepts with room to spare. Even then Vampire Counts is a rich enough vein to mine for several distinct concepts. Whereas Skaven still was also large enough of a concept (though I hesitate to describe the Skaven theme lest I fall afoul of the board rules) to cut down into factions, Eshin really boils down to "Err... ninjas and more ninja-y ninjas I guess?". It just doesn't scale up well. Another example here that comes to mind, Dwarf Slayers. The concept of taking that into an entire army was insane, and it's no surprise the mechanics/playability for it on the tabletop was so-so. From the perspective of what makes enjoyable games.

[Wraith]

All this goes back to the narrowness of the theme "Vampire Counts" started out as "Undead" a concept broad enough it could be split into 2 large effectively separated thematic concepts with room to spare. Even then Vampire Counts is a rich enough vein to mine for several distinct concepts.

They did just that towards the end of Warhammer Fantasy, but then converged them back into 'mixed bloodlines' without distinct cultures in the End Times - not just splitting Undead into Necromantic (Vampires and 'monsters') and Khemri (Ancient Egypt and Skeletons), but Vampires themselves were split into 5 distinct 'Clans':

Blood Knights - Evil Not-Bretonnia
Lahmia - Sort-of Khemri troops with sort-of Dark Elven Magic
Von Carstein - Traditional all-rounders with a mix of zombies, ghosts, etc
Strigoi - Monstrous generals with a tendency towards 'living undead' troops like Ghouls
Necrarch - Super-Wizards

They could be a bit wonky on the tabletop sometimes, but I miss the bloodlines. It opened up a vein (as it were...) of lore that went right back to Nagash and his genesis as a human wizard, and some of the models that were made for them were excellent centrepieces. It really gave people a jumping-off point around which to theme an army too, rather than just 'generic Vampire leading undead troops'.

[Avaris]

They did just that towards the end of Warhammer Fantasy, but then converged them back into 'mixed bloodlines' without distinct cultures in the End Times - not just splitting Undead into Necromantic (Vampires and 'monsters') and Khemri (Ancient Egypt and Skeletons), but Vampires themselves were split into 5 distinct 'Clans':

Blood Knights - Evil Not-Bretonnia
Lahmia - Sort-of Khemri troops with sort-of Dark Elven Magic
Von Carstein - Traditional all-rounders with a mix of zombies, ghosts, etc
Strigoi - Monstrous generals with a tendency towards 'living undead' troops like Ghouls
Necrarch - Super-Wizards

They could be a bit wonky on the tabletop sometimes, but I miss the bloodlines. It opened up a vein (as it were...) of lore that went right back to Nagash and his genesis as a human wizard, and some of the models that were made for them were excellent centrepieces. It really gave people a jumping-off point around which to theme an army too, rather than just 'generic Vampire leading undead troops'.

It was also good because most of the army used the same basic troops, i.e. skeletons. So you could happily have vampires from multiple bloodlines in your collection and change them around a bit for a particular game, perhaps with one or two key units changing as well.

[Eldan]

I always liked the Strigoi the most. THeir background is great, as were their powers. I guess some of that got integrated into the Flesheater Courts, but AoS, so eh.

Still, the idea that they had an actual nation and cities of humans they ruled (and well enough the still have humans serving them) is fascinating. Despite being cannibalistic serial killer monsters with armies of ghouls.

[snowblizz]

They did just that towards the end of Warhammer Fantasy, but then converged them back into 'mixed bloodlines' without distinct cultures in the End Times - not just splitting Undead into Necromantic (Vampires and 'monsters') and Khemri (Ancient Egypt and Skeletons), but Vampires themselves were split into 5 distinct 'Clans':

Blood Knights - Evil Not-Bretonnia
Lahmia - Sort-of Khemri troops with sort-of Dark Elven Magic
Von Carstein - Traditional all-rounders with a mix of zombies, ghosts, etc
Strigoi - Monstrous generals with a tendency towards 'living undead' troops like Ghouls
Necrarch - Super-Wizards

They could be a bit wonky on the tabletop sometimes, but I miss the bloodlines. It opened up a vein (as it were...) of lore that went right back to Nagash and his genesis as a human wizard, and some of the models that were made for them were excellent centrepieces. It really gave people a jumping-off point around which to theme an army too, rather than just 'generic Vampire leading undead troops'.

Yea that was *exactly* what I was referring to. "Undeath" and then "Vampires" as a concept had so much popular culture and traditions attached it could feed several subfactions of "vampire theme".
You also had "Vampire Pirates", even got a armylist in White Dwarf, and then in Storm of Chaos you get the "Empire/Sylvania" mixlist.

Things like Kislev (the main steppe people theme already co-opted by Chaos) and Bretonnia to a certain degree are so much thinner concepts. I'll note "the Empire" was also broad enough that effectively the Ogre Kingdoms are a successor race (though OK itself only worked by effectively totally reimagining ogres, effectively taking a small concept and building an entirely new thing atop it). And it was possible to fairly successfully create regionally themed armies. Incidentally the Kislev armylist never really graduated to anything more than auxillary force.

Not sure what I was saying anymore but something along the lines of "don't try to make up too many units in an already too shallow pool of ideas". It only really works if you make up enough new stuff which buries the original concept. Or again, if we start adding all kinds of stuff to Bretonnia we will soon find it doesn't look or feel like the original concept anymore.

[Eldan]

I remember that when the Ogres first came out, they actually felt a lot like orcs up to 11. Big infantry brutes and goblinoids, and specialized war machines and monsters.

[snowblizz]

I remember that when the Ogres first came out, they actually felt a lot like orcs up to 11. Big infantry brutes and goblinoids, and specialized war machines and monsters.

Indeed. Beastmen variously got lumped in as "Brown Orcs" (the 6th ed tide-me-over lists effectively were that) and OK could be "Big Orcs". They all draw from the "barbarians" archetype, which should be broad enough, but then regular Chaos also uses it. Even a rich archetype suffers when too many concepts try to make use of it.

Elves are basically Good, Neutral and Evil elves, and this just about works. But IMO at leat High Elfs were ridiculously pushing the limits of feasible unit concepts at the end. E.g. they didn't seem able to decide if eagles, dragons or phoenixes are the thematic monster so bam! we go all of them. None of it adding character as much as killing us with choices. A 4th elf faction e.g. would be very difficult to shoehorn in thematically. Similarly Chaos was heading right into everything for everyone territory IMO collapsing under it's own weight of stuff.

Age of Sigmar as a whole what little I've looked on it basically smashes up the classic tropes to try and create trademarkable "unique" tropes. Elves lumped together, Orcs and Ogres now the same "neutral warriors barbarians" or something like that.

[Wraith]

Yea that was *exactly* what I was referring to. "Undeath" and then "Vampires" as a concept had so much popular culture and traditions attached it could feed several subfactions of "vampire theme".

I feel like the problem for GW is that if they kept the Vampire Counts book around and also had Khemri armies, it left the generic 'Undead/Necromantic' army somewhat anaemic. Either that or they just ran out of imagination.

Let's have 5 different types of Vampire and they all use Undead troops in different ratios - that sounds cool. Now, what else do Undead armies have?

...

... Uhh... Nagash, I guess? Except that he's a big part of the End Times and we can't just have him 'only' be a Necromantic hero because that excludes ~70% of the undead population from Khemria. Besides; he's a big skeleton now rather than an Evil Clown, we *have* to have him leading Khemri Armies if just for that.

Necromancers? A normal human Wizard who is inferior in every way to a Necrarch? Hardly a selling point and somewhat lacking in ambition. Even the named character, Heinrich Kemmler, was just a dude with a book and a big hat.

I think they should have introduced 'Frankenstein'-style Mad Scientists to the lore, quite frankly. It might have been weird to include "science" into the 'animated by dark magic' faction but it's worked for Dwarfs and Skaven so it could have been fun. Hell, why not have Dwarf and Skaven characters who have found a way to raise the dead and use THEM as the Necromantic faction, and fill their units with Golems and constructs who can throw lightning about as a gimmick? That would be great!

Or make one of the special characters a sentient Zombie/Lich Dragon. Warhammer always needs more Dragons, in my opinion. Then again, I said the same thing about the Sons of Behemoth - who wants giants (tall humans dressed in a loin cloth) when you could have an army of Dragons, or huge Star Spawn, or ocean-dwelling Leviathan, or something?

Things like Kislev (the main steppe people theme already co-opted by Chaos) and Bretonnia to a certain degree are so much thinner concepts. I'll note "the Empire" was also broad enough that effectively the Ogre Kingdoms are a successor race.

Ogre Kingdoms at least filled a niche - they were the army that used Big Monsters On Big Bases And Nothing Else, so they had some mechanical value.

Kislev was never really a thing even in the old editions - for a long, long time they were just another variant of the Empire faction with their own special character, or they were just fluff to explain where your non-Chaos Warrior human troops came from. That's all they really needed to be, I think.

Bretonnia was always the difficult child. Everything was stacked so heavily on their theme being Mounted Knights that the instant any other army picked up decent mounted units - the Empire for one, and later Dark Elves were hugely dominant in the meta too - then there was no reason to use them. They really needed a good, hard reboot to give them something else worthwhile, but instead they entered the deadly spiral of no one wanting to play them, so they weren't given any new releases, so no one wanted to play them....

[Destro_Yersul]

Of the major Skaven clans only Eshin has trouble working on an army level. There was a series of articles in White Dwarf with expanded armylists based around the major clans. All this goes back to the narrowness of the theme "Vampire Counts" started out as "Undead" a concept broad enough it could be split into 2 large effectively separated thematic concepts with room to spare. Even then Vampire Counts is a rich enough vein to mine for several distinct concepts. Whereas Skaven still was also large enough of a concept (though I hesitate to describe the Skaven theme lest I fall afoul of the board rules) to cut down into factions, Eshin really boils down to "Err... ninjas and more ninja-y ninjas I guess?". It just doesn't scale up well. Another example here that comes to mind, Dwarf Slayers. The concept of taking that into an entire army was insane, and it's no surprise the mechanics/playability for it on the tabletop was so-so. From the perspective of what makes enjoyable games.

I mean, the Skaven 'theme' is basically just "Mad science and rat stereotypes." And bells. Lots of bells.

Ogre Kingdoms at least filled a niche - they were the army that used Big Monsters On Big Bases And Nothing Else, so they had some mechanical value.

Gnoblars will remember this

[The Glyphstone]

Whatever happened to Chaos Dwarfs again, while we are discussing redundant army lists?

[Wraith]

Whatever happened to Chaos Dwarfs again, while we are discussing redundant army lists?

In terms of GW, marketing and the likes, they were the Warhammer Fantasy equivalent to Sisters of Battle.
They had an army long, long ago (4th edition WHFB) that never got updated, or if it did, only as a White Dwarf version that didn't come with any new models after about ~1999 or so. They pretty much hit the same downward spiral as Bretonnia, albeit much earlier - an edition changed so people stopped buying them in preparation for the next new update, but they didn't get updated very quickly, so no one bought them, and because no one was buying them they didn't get updated.... etc.

Because they never had that big of a list available in the first place, GW just let them slip into the long night except in very minor pieces of lore or in Blood Bowl, and even that was recently brought to an end. No one was interested in an army that was "Dwarfs, but with worse troops, and worse war-machines, and worse magic" that was also hard to collect and dumb looking anyway.

Despite some very impressive pieces put out by Forgeworld when the Legions of Azgorth warscroll was released at the advent of AoS, it wasn't enough to bring back an army that no one had been able to buy for over 15 years, not when rival companies like Mantic Games were already releasing their own version of much better supported "Abyssal Dwarfs". Forgeworld was, as always, WAY too expensive and again were never promised to get a 'proper' update so buying them to play with was a fool's errand.

In the Lore, they just became a part of the generic 'Chaos' brand. They're no longer considered Chaos DWARFS and are just considered CHAOS dwarfs - to give them a 40k equivalent they're now like the Dark Mechanicus, just hanging out and building Daemon Weapons and ruling enormous darksteel forges but don't bother to make appearances themselves. Some of them ended up in the Realm of Fire alongside normal Dwarfs, more or less doing the same thing and keeping out of each others' way.