Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Skarbrand - Khornes Rage Feaster!

BiesBies Junior MemberPosts: 1,447Registered Users
"Vecteek couldn’t come. So I came instead. You have called and I have answered. You sought the Harbinger of Doom. I am he, little sorcerer. I am your Doom. I am Skarbrand. I am your death..."

—Skarbrand, summoned forth by the foolishness of Grey Seer Thanquol











"I will rip the bones from your body and leave your skin to rot! But your skull I will give to the skull-god, and it will be one among the multitude"

—Skarbrand, The Exiled One





"Run, fleshing! You cannot hide!"

—Skarbrand, during the Battle of Karak Angkul




"No, you shall not escape me so easily. You will burn, mage-rat, and then you will scream. And scream. And scream."

—Skarbrand, during the Battle of Karak Angkul








Khaela Furdiekh Mensha Farmiekh Khaine!








«1

Comments

  • DomusvondutchDomusvondutch Senior Member Posts: 184Registered Users
    edited December 2018
    An initiative and weapon skill of 10! Red ones goes faster? Wings but no flying? That's just a strange creature.
  • LudboneLudbone Posts: 1,043Registered Users
    Pretty cool. U'zhul and Valkia should be the first 2 Khorne Lords, but Skarbrand must be the 3rd.
    Beastmen: where is the love?


  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Posts: 1,535Registered Users
    Ludbone said:

    Pretty cool. U'zhul and Valkia should be the first 2 Khorne Lords, but Skarbrand must be the 3rd.

    Valkia is a Warriors of Chaos lord, U'zhul is "just" a Bloodletter and monogods armies is never going to happen..

    With that being said, Skarbrand should take a backseat to Ka'bandha.
  • JamjarTheFailJamjarTheFail Posts: 7Registered Users

    An initiative and weapon skill of 10! Red ones goes faster? Wings but no flying? That's just a strange creature.

    His wings were destroyed when he was cast down by Khorne, getting smashed around by a god does a number on you, even to a deamon prince like Skarbrand.
  • GingerRoeBroGingerRoeBro Senior Member Posts: 2,733Registered Users
    Ludbone said:

    Pretty cool. U'zhul and Valkia should be the first 2 Khorne Lords, but Skarbrand must be the 3rd.

    Valkia is a WoC
    Keep the WoC in their roster please :smile:
    Bigger Budget for game 3?

    They're gonna need it for all of the monogod glory.
    Which will be the "4 distinct gods representing the different aspects of Chaos such as Khorne, Slaanesh, Tzeentch, and Nurgle." :blush: ^CA quote

    Thank you CA for seeing them as what they truly are.
    Let the Games Begin!
    https://warhammerfantasy.fandom.com/wiki/The_Great_Game
  • GingerRoeBroGingerRoeBro Senior Member Posts: 2,733Registered Users

    Ludbone said:

    Pretty cool. U'zhul and Valkia should be the first 2 Khorne Lords, but Skarbrand must be the 3rd.

    Valkia is a Warriors of Chaos lord, U'zhul is "just" a Bloodletter and monogods armies is never going to happen..

    With that being said, Skarbrand should take a backseat to Ka'bandha.
    You are off topic. If you want to whine about how it'll never happen. Do so in your own thread :smile:
    Bigger Budget for game 3?

    They're gonna need it for all of the monogod glory.
    Which will be the "4 distinct gods representing the different aspects of Chaos such as Khorne, Slaanesh, Tzeentch, and Nurgle." :blush: ^CA quote

    Thank you CA for seeing them as what they truly are.
    Let the Games Begin!
    https://warhammerfantasy.fandom.com/wiki/The_Great_Game
  • misunderstoodvampiremisunderstoodvampire Posts: 548Registered Users

    Ludbone said:

    Pretty cool. U'zhul and Valkia should be the first 2 Khorne Lords, but Skarbrand must be the 3rd.

    Valkia is a Warriors of Chaos lord, U'zhul is "just" a Bloodletter and monogods armies is never going to happen..

    With that being said, Skarbrand should take a backseat to Ka'bandha.
    “U’zhul Is just a bloodletter” and Tyrion and Teclis are just elves and Archaon and Karl Franz are just men. Etc. And monogods will be their own entity in Warhammer 3 whether at or post release you can take that to the bank. And why should Skarbrand take a back seat to an inferior melee combatant?
  • Infinite_MawInfinite_Maw Posts: 1,113Registered Users
    I am curious about the choice of initial daemon lords. One issue is that the most important lords for each god are large targets, so you could come up with some counter play regarding their size. Maybe they will surprise us and have something like the changeling as an intial release Tzeentch lord since we currently have a giant kfc lord in WoC.
  • PocmanPocman Posts: 2,382Registered Users
    Best part of his story is when Thanquol, in completely voluntary and controlled way, unleashed him on the mortal plane.

    "It was my plan all along, yes-yes"
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Posts: 1,535Registered Users

    Ludbone said:

    Pretty cool. U'zhul and Valkia should be the first 2 Khorne Lords, but Skarbrand must be the 3rd.

    Valkia is a Warriors of Chaos lord, U'zhul is "just" a Bloodletter and monogods armies is never going to happen..

    With that being said, Skarbrand should take a backseat to Ka'bandha.
    “U’zhul Is just a bloodletter” and Tyrion and Teclis are just elves and Archaon and Karl Franz are just men. Etc. And monogods will be their own entity in Warhammer 3 whether at or post release you can take that to the bank. And why should Skarbrand take a back seat to an inferior melee combatant?
    Ka'bandha ranks above Skarbrand. Mostly because Skarbrand isn't ranked at all any more.. Basically Ka'bandha is the replacement Skarbrand for Khorne, and as such is the better representation of Khorne. Also, Ka'bandha actually has personality and sentience beyond eternally killing stuff. Put shortly: He is a better character in every single imaginable way.
  • LudboneLudbone Posts: 1,043Registered Users

    Ludbone said:

    Pretty cool. U'zhul and Valkia should be the first 2 Khorne Lords, but Skarbrand must be the 3rd.

    Valkia is a Warriors of Chaos lord, U'zhul is "just" a Bloodletter and monogods armies is never going to happen..

    With that being said, Skarbrand should take a backseat to Ka'bandha.
    Nice joke.
    Beastmen: where is the love?


  • TayvarTayvar Posts: 9,544Registered Users
    That's a beautiful picture of Khorne Themed Army, with without any daemons mishmash. :)
    4 Fully Independent Monogods Armies would be great for a Storyline about the Great Game in Total War: Warhammer 3.
  • PocmanPocman Posts: 2,382Registered Users
    Tayvar said:

    That's a beautiful picture of Khorne Themed Army, with without any daemons mishmash. :)

    Yep, you can actually see their full roster in that picture.
  • TayvarTayvar Posts: 9,544Registered Users
    Pocman said:

    Tayvar said:

    That's a beautiful picture of Khorne Themed Army, with without any daemons mishmash. :)

    Yep, you can actually see their full roster in that picture.
    Actually Khorne had some more models, and CA could expand on that theme, with Forgeworld's help.
    4 Fully Independent Monogods Armies would be great for a Storyline about the Great Game in Total War: Warhammer 3.
  • LudboneLudbone Posts: 1,043Registered Users
    edited December 2018
    I can't wait to see Khorne's mixed and fully expanded army! It will be so huge, bloody and cool!

    Instant preorder.
    Beastmen: where is the love?


  • GodWillTellGodWillTell Posts: 643Registered Users
    Nice post :)

    Skarbrand is surely my second favorite Khorne's Daemon, after U'zhul (and LOL nope, U'zhul is not a mere Bloodletter, what the hell. I guess Ungrim is just a normal slayer...)

    Edit: funny how the Monogods whiners try to ruin a normal thread with their childish bs.

    #FORGHORGON
  • TayvarTayvar Posts: 9,544Registered Users

    An initiative and weapon skill of 10! Red ones goes faster? Wings but no flying? That's just a strange creature.

    His wings were destroyed when he was cast down by Khorne, getting smashed around by a God does a number on you, even to a Deamon Prince like Skarbrand.
    Actually Skarbrand is a Greater Daemon and not a Deamon Prince, meaning that Skarbrand didn't used to be a Human, as for his Wings, well at least him not flying in Total War would be justified. :)
    4 Fully Independent Monogods Armies would be great for a Storyline about the Great Game in Total War: Warhammer 3.
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Posts: 1,535Registered Users

    Nice post :)

    Skarbrand is surely my second favorite Khorne's Daemon, after U'zhul (and LOL nope, U'zhul is not a mere Bloodletter, what the hell. I guess Ungrim is just a normal slayer...)

    Edit: funny how the Monogods whiners try to ruin a normal thread with their childish bs.

    U'zhul (or rather Skulltaker as he was renamed in 8th ed.) IS a Bloodletter, and as such, by his very nature, is second to ANY Bloodthirster... Meaning he would be a terrible faction leader..
  • ArsenicArsenic Posts: 3,985Registered Users

    Ludbone said:

    Pretty cool. U'zhul and Valkia should be the first 2 Khorne Lords, but Skarbrand must be the 3rd.

    Valkia is a Warriors of Chaos lord, U'zhul is "just" a Bloodletter and monogods armies is never going to happen..

    With that being said, Skarbrand should take a backseat to Ka'bandha.
    I've read and re-read this comment, and for the life of me can't see what is in it to warrant being flagged once, never mind four flippin' times.


  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Posts: 1,535Registered Users
    Arsenic said:

    Ludbone said:

    Pretty cool. U'zhul and Valkia should be the first 2 Khorne Lords, but Skarbrand must be the 3rd.

    Valkia is a Warriors of Chaos lord, U'zhul is "just" a Bloodletter and monogods armies is never going to happen..

    With that being said, Skarbrand should take a backseat to Ka'bandha.
    I've read and re-read this comment, and for the life of me can't see what is in it to warrant being flagged once, never mind four flippin' times.
    Monogod fanboys are a rabid bunch. You get used to it.
  • ScreamimgEnvyScreamimgEnvy Posts: 266Registered Users
    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.
    Team Monogods - Team Nurgle

  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Posts: 1,535Registered Users

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
  • misunderstoodvampiremisunderstoodvampire Posts: 548Registered Users

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
    Actually U’zhul Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince in the form of a bloodletter. He was once a mortal man. So you are half right and wrong
  • stankgangstastankgangsta Junior Member Posts: 238Registered Users
    Skarbrand will probably replace the Suneater as the most powerful freak beast. On a side not I hope with make it so Lords of Change and bloodthristers can fly, I want them to be able to assault Dragon and show those puny lizards their proper place in the order of the universe
  • stankgangstastankgangsta Junior Member Posts: 238Registered Users

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
    Actually U’zhul Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince in the form of a bloodletter. He was once a mortal man. So you are half right and wrong
    Newer lore now has all bloodletters as former creatures while older lore had them as pure daemons.
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Posts: 13,465Registered Users
    Over the top lords like this are why I'm really looking forward to Demons in their brilliant, loreful undivided glory.

    He has no personality which is a minus, but he is the most well known Demon, can't exclude him.
    Game 3 must have variety in its core races. Ogres, Chaos Dwarfs, Kislev, and Demons of Chaos in its full iconic, glorious, undivided glory.
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Posts: 1,535Registered Users

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
    Actually U’zhul Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince in the form of a bloodletter. He was once a mortal man. So you are half right and wrong
    No... The lore of Skulltaker makes it quite clear that Skulltaker started out as a Bloodletter.... The Old lore for U'zhul the Skulltaker (ie. old lore) had him indeed be a Daemon Prince, but that has since been retconned, for the reason I stated previously presumably..

    From Skulltakers lore:
    "So it is that a Daemon that began existence as a Bloodletter has become something to command the respect of the Dark Gods themselves."
    So he obbviously isn't a Daemon Prince..

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
    Actually U’zhul Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince in the form of a bloodletter. He was once a mortal man. So you are half right and wrong
    Newer lore now has all bloodletters as former creatures while older lore had them as pure daemons.
    No... Newer lore says that it is BELIEVED that Bloodletters were once amongst Khorne's favored mortals... obviously they aren't, since then they would all be Daemon Princes, which they aren't...

    "The Daemon hordes of Khorne are made up of ferocious Bloodletters, deadly warriors believed to have been foremost amongst the Blood God’s followers in mortal life and whose will is as implacable and blood-hungry as Khorne himself."

    The lore quite clearly states that it is only a belief held by some. Since we, as the players, know more about the nature (or anti-nature I guess..) of Daemons, we can conclude that this is a false belief. Since if they had indeed been mortals elevated to daemonhood, then they would have become Daemon Princes, and not just mere Bloodletters.
  • misunderstoodvampiremisunderstoodvampire Posts: 548Registered Users

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
    Actually U’zhul Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince in the form of a bloodletter. He was once a mortal man. So you are half right and wrong
    No... The lore of Skulltaker makes it quite clear that Skulltaker started out as a Bloodletter.... The Old lore for U'zhul the Skulltaker (ie. old lore) had him indeed be a Daemon Prince, but that has since been retconned, for the reason I stated previously presumably..

    From Skulltakers lore:
    "So it is that a Daemon that began existence as a Bloodletter has become something to command the respect of the Dark Gods themselves."
    So he obbviously isn't a Daemon Prince..

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
    Actually U’zhul Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince in the form of a bloodletter. He was once a mortal man. So you are half right and wrong
    Newer lore now has all bloodletters as former creatures while older lore had them as pure daemons.
    No... Newer lore says that it is BELIEVED that Bloodletters were once amongst Khorne's favored mortals... obviously they aren't, since then they would all be Daemon Princes, which they aren't...

    "The Daemon hordes of Khorne are made up of ferocious Bloodletters, deadly warriors believed to have been foremost amongst the Blood God’s followers in mortal life and whose will is as implacable and blood-hungry as Khorne himself."

    The lore quite clearly states that it is only a belief held by some. Since we, as the players, know more about the nature (or anti-nature I guess..) of Daemons, we can conclude that this is a false belief. Since if they had indeed been mortals elevated to daemonhood, then they would have become Daemon Princes, and not just mere Bloodletters.
    Oh was Vrkas retconned in the 8th edition? The couple of sources I read on the Internet states he was a Kurgan turned Daemon prince in the for of a bloodletter. What edition did Vrkas get retconned? That’s too bad. I liked his story
  • TayvarTayvar Posts: 9,544Registered Users

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
    Actually U’zhul Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince in the form of a bloodletter. He was once a mortal man. So you are half right and wrong
    No... The lore of Skulltaker makes it quite clear that Skulltaker started out as a Bloodletter.... The Old lore for U'zhul the Skulltaker (ie. old lore) had him indeed be a Daemon Prince, but that has since been retconned, for the reason I stated previously presumably..

    From Skulltakers lore:
    "So it is that a Daemon that began existence as a Bloodletter has become something to command the respect of the Dark Gods themselves."
    So he obbviously isn't a Daemon Prince..

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
    Actually U’zhul Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince in the form of a bloodletter. He was once a mortal man. So you are half right and wrong
    Newer lore now has all bloodletters as former creatures while older lore had them as pure daemons.
    No... Newer lore says that it is BELIEVED that Bloodletters were once amongst Khorne's favored mortals... obviously they aren't, since then they would all be Daemon Princes, which they aren't...

    "The Daemon hordes of Khorne are made up of ferocious Bloodletters, deadly warriors believed to have been foremost amongst the Blood God’s followers in mortal life and whose will is as implacable and blood-hungry as Khorne himself."

    The lore quite clearly states that it is only a belief held by some. Since we, as the players, know more about the nature (or anti-nature I guess..) of Daemons, we can conclude that this is a false belief. Since if they had indeed been mortals elevated to daemonhood, then they would have become Daemon Princes, and not just mere Bloodletters.
    Oh was Vrkas retconned in the 8th edition? The couple of sources I read on the Internet states he was a Kurgan turned Daemon prince in the for of a bloodletter. What edition did Vrkas get retconned? That’s too bad. I liked his story
    There is a debate about U'Zhul in the Warhammer Wiki, but he sure looks like a Glorified Bloodletter.
    4 Fully Independent Monogods Armies would be great for a Storyline about the Great Game in Total War: Warhammer 3.
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Posts: 1,535Registered Users

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
    Actually U’zhul Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince in the form of a bloodletter. He was once a mortal man. So you are half right and wrong
    No... The lore of Skulltaker makes it quite clear that Skulltaker started out as a Bloodletter.... The Old lore for U'zhul the Skulltaker (ie. old lore) had him indeed be a Daemon Prince, but that has since been retconned, for the reason I stated previously presumably..

    From Skulltakers lore:
    "So it is that a Daemon that began existence as a Bloodletter has become something to command the respect of the Dark Gods themselves."
    So he obbviously isn't a Daemon Prince..

    Skarbrand as FLC sounds perfect to me. He's a reservoir dog due to his 'betrayal', if we can call it in that way.

    U'zhul The Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince of Khorne and he should be one of the Khorne core Legendary Lords, with a Mortal follower as the other core Legendary Lord like Skarr Bloodwrath or Egil. 1 Daemon and 1 Mortal for the mixed Khorne roster is what i'm looking at.

    Skulltaker is most certainly not a Daemon Prince... He is a Bloodletter. A Bloodletter that is extremely skilled and favoured by Khorne, but still "just" a Bloodletter.

    U'zhul the Skulltaker was retconned out of existence (or rather he was just simplified into the 'Skulltaker' character). Obviously because his name was identical to U'zhul the Bloodthirster inside Archaon's sword..
    Actually U’zhul Skulltaker is a Daemon Prince in the form of a bloodletter. He was once a mortal man. So you are half right and wrong
    Newer lore now has all bloodletters as former creatures while older lore had them as pure daemons.
    No... Newer lore says that it is BELIEVED that Bloodletters were once amongst Khorne's favored mortals... obviously they aren't, since then they would all be Daemon Princes, which they aren't...

    "The Daemon hordes of Khorne are made up of ferocious Bloodletters, deadly warriors believed to have been foremost amongst the Blood God’s followers in mortal life and whose will is as implacable and blood-hungry as Khorne himself."

    The lore quite clearly states that it is only a belief held by some. Since we, as the players, know more about the nature (or anti-nature I guess..) of Daemons, we can conclude that this is a false belief. Since if they had indeed been mortals elevated to daemonhood, then they would have become Daemon Princes, and not just mere Bloodletters.
    Oh was Vrkas retconned in the 8th edition? The couple of sources I read on the Internet states he was a Kurgan turned Daemon prince in the for of a bloodletter. What edition did Vrkas get retconned? That’s too bad. I liked his story
    7th edition introduced U'zhul the Skulltaker (mortal name: Vrkas), but they retconned the character in 8th edition, to simply be "The Skulltaker", (presumably) since U'zhul was already the name of the Daemon inside Archaon's sword. Their lore, at least the Daemon parts, are still pretty much identical, but The Skulltaker was definitely a Bloodletter and not a Daemon Prince.
Sign In or Register to comment.