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

Nagash should be a legendary hero. not a LL.

2

Comments

  • GreenColouredGreenColoured Registered Users Posts: 3,335
    edited September 22
    LMAO

    Yes TC, I totally want Nagash to be demoted to hero tier so I can embed him in a Master Necromancer's army to lick his shoes and in a later turn, embed in Helman Ghorst's army and start calling him "Ghorst-sama~!". Even later he will trip on a rock and be wounded for 5 turns trying to Steal Tech from Pigbarter


    It was a mistake with Ariel and it will be an even bigger mistake with Nagash. Kroak is more of a tool than a living being so that was mildly passable


    (On the flip side, Snikch being a Lord was also a mistake)
  • DjauDjau Registered Users Posts: 7,786
    Nagash has his own unique lore of magic, the Lore of Undeath and his Mortarch mechanic. No way he is coming as less than a Lord as part of his own faction.
    Albion would make the perfect Total War Warhammer 3 pre-order; with Hengus the Druid and Bran MacKerog as Legendary Lords.

    We're paying full price for a Chaos Warrior of Tzeentch without any actual Tzeentch markings or changes to the model? Change this now CA, #JusticeForTzeentch #TLM
  • QuecoQueco Registered Users Posts: 272
    Nagash wants to not only rule over the undead, but EVERYTHING. He essentially created undead and vampires to be his servants in the process of gaining immortality. It would be a massive mistake to make him a LH.

    CA, in my opinion, has done a number of mistakes with certain Lords and Heroes.
    1. Gortek and Felix: gotrek is a slayer... not a bloody general. The only slayer that leads armies is the Slayer King. They should have made them a LH and have 2 models together, much like Skarsnik and his squig. I cannot use him as CA implemented him because it infuriates me to no end. Thank god for modders and their amazing work.
    2. Isabella: She should have been a LH and be together with Vlad always...
    3. Grombindal: should have been a LH. He is much like the Green Knight of Bretonnia. He would appear in dire times, save the battle, then disappear and quickly as he would appear.


  • caladbolgftwcaladbolgftw Registered Users Posts: 185
    If Nagash sees this, he is going to enslave the soul of whoever wrote or agree with this post.

    Nagash do not serve and he sees everyone (even his commanding elites/officers, Arkhan) but him his slaves.
  • LoreguyLoreguy Registered Users Posts: 872

    LMAO

    Yes TC, I totally want Nagash to be demoted to hero tier so I can embed him in a Master Necromancer's army to lick his shoes and in a later turn, embed in Helman Ghorst's army and start calling him "Ghorst-sama~!". Even later he will trip on a rock and be wounded for 5 turns trying to Steal Tech from Pigbarter


    It was a mistake with Ariel and it will be an even bigger mistake with Nagash. Kroak is more of a tool than a living being so that was mildly passable


    (On the flip side, Snikch being a Lord was also a mistake)

    You got me with "Even later he will trip on a rock and be wounded for 5 turns trying to Steal Tech from Pigbarter"

    LOL! I started giggling at work imaginig Nagash himself sniffing around Pigbarter trying to copy random Skaven technology.
  • Commissar_GCommissar_G Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 14,620

    Loreguy said:

    Nagash does not serve. He is supreme lord of undead.

    You're going to be in for a shock when you find out Lord Kroak is a LH.
    Last time I checked kroak couldn't command anything and just directed his skink attendants to take him to where he need to be
    Tell that to the myriad other examples of Lords and Heroes not being able to command in TT but can in TW.
  • KillertutKillertut Registered Users Posts: 459
    legendary lord or hero, either would be fine with me. imo a ll is far more likely.
  • TempestWolfTempestWolf Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,022
    Yes, LH is exactly where he belongs
  • caladbolgftwcaladbolgftw Registered Users Posts: 185

    Yes, LH is exactly where he belongs

    This one Nagash shall claim and torture for eternity. One of his favorite torture method was to have his victim drink his immortal elixir then have swarm of tomb scarabs to chew up the victim's flesh. It was done to Arkhan btw.
  • Jote191Jote191 Registered Users Posts: 1,365
    Sorry bro I'm gonna have to add this into my cringe compilation.


    For real though the only people who want this don't understand Nagash. He's quite essentially the most LEGENDARY Legendary Lord there is. He literally had other very major Undead characters serve him as lackies and is basically the ruler of the Underworld. Having him not lead armies is such a terrible idea and completely misses the point of his character.
  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Registered Users Posts: 3,866
    ooofph that ratio.

    I don't really care as long as he is implemented in the game but I expect most people want him as the leader of a "Legions of Nagash" race. CA might have to make one up like they're doing with Cathay.
    Request scorched body textures, poisoned dying animations for infantry's skeletons, a blood slider that allows us to control how much blood appears in battle and make proper death animations for all ethereal units so they vanish for Blood for the Blood God 3.
  • Jote191Jote191 Registered Users Posts: 1,365

    Loreguy said:

    Nagash does not serve. He is supreme lord of undead.

    You're going to be in for a shock when you find out Lord Kroak is a LH.
    Lord Kroak has never lead armies in the lore. He is a super overpowered wizard, not general. It's not even remotely comparable to Nagash.
  • Commissar_GCommissar_G Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 14,620
    Jote191 said:

    Loreguy said:

    Nagash does not serve. He is supreme lord of undead.

    You're going to be in for a shock when you find out Lord Kroak is a LH.
    Lord Kroak has never lead armies in the lore. He is a super overpowered wizard, not general. It's not even remotely comparable to Nagash.
    Lots of characters couldn’t lead on TT but can here. Hell Gelt was promoted to Elector Count.
  • Jote191Jote191 Registered Users Posts: 1,365

    Jote191 said:

    Loreguy said:

    Nagash does not serve. He is supreme lord of undead.

    You're going to be in for a shock when you find out Lord Kroak is a LH.
    Lord Kroak has never lead armies in the lore. He is a super overpowered wizard, not general. It's not even remotely comparable to Nagash.
    Lots of characters couldn’t lead on TT but can here. Hell Gelt was promoted to Elector Count.
    Yeah which is why someone who is known primarily for leading massive undead armies definitely should be a legendary lord. Referring to Nagash by the way.

    Also the way Kroak is described makes him not legendary lord material. He's busy being dead and is used on the battlefield just for his great magic. I can't imagine him discussing with the other lizardmen tribes about military plans.
  • Commissar_GCommissar_G Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 14,620
    Jote191 said:

    Jote191 said:

    Loreguy said:

    Nagash does not serve. He is supreme lord of undead.

    You're going to be in for a shock when you find out Lord Kroak is a LH.
    Lord Kroak has never lead armies in the lore. He is a super overpowered wizard, not general. It's not even remotely comparable to Nagash.
    Lots of characters couldn’t lead on TT but can here. Hell Gelt was promoted to Elector Count.
    Yeah which is why someone who is known primarily for leading massive undead armies definitely should be a legendary lord. Referring to Nagash by the way.

    Also the way Kroak is described makes him not legendary lord material. He's busy being dead and is used on the battlefield just for his great magic. I can't imagine him discussing with the other lizardmen tribes about military plans.
    Why are you trying to convince me? All I was pointing out in that comment is emphasising LORD like he did doesn't mean a character will or should be a LL.

    And you using tabletop rules as argument for that is already a nonargument due to the plethora of examples we already have of that not being necessary.


    This forum has turned into such a cess pit of red team v blue team you can't even point out a terrible argument without someone assuming you hate Nagash.
  • Jote191Jote191 Registered Users Posts: 1,365

    Jote191 said:

    Jote191 said:

    Loreguy said:

    Nagash does not serve. He is supreme lord of undead.

    You're going to be in for a shock when you find out Lord Kroak is a LH.
    Lord Kroak has never lead armies in the lore. He is a super overpowered wizard, not general. It's not even remotely comparable to Nagash.
    Lots of characters couldn’t lead on TT but can here. Hell Gelt was promoted to Elector Count.
    Yeah which is why someone who is known primarily for leading massive undead armies definitely should be a legendary lord. Referring to Nagash by the way.

    Also the way Kroak is described makes him not legendary lord material. He's busy being dead and is used on the battlefield just for his great magic. I can't imagine him discussing with the other lizardmen tribes about military plans.
    This forum has turned into such a cess pit of red team v blue team you can't even point out a terrible argument without someone assuming you hate Nagash.
    Lol that is true. It's basically bloodsport.
  • Cryptic_FreezeCryptic_Freeze Registered Users Posts: 428
    Ah ****










    I can't believe you've done this
  • overtaker40overtaker40 Registered Users Posts: 231
    Jote191 said:

    Sorry bro I'm gonna have to add this into my cringe compilation.


    For real though the only people who want this don't understand Nagash. He's quite essentially the most LEGENDARY Legendary Lord there is. He literally had other very major Undead characters serve him as lackies and is basically the ruler of the Underworld. Having him not lead armies is such a terrible idea and completely misses the point of his character.

    but thats the problem. Hes too strong. Same as kroak. I think people are getting caught up on the hero part of Legendary hero, it doesnt have to mean he is less.
  • arthadawarthadaw Registered Users Posts: 1,092

    Jote191 said:

    Sorry bro I'm gonna have to add this into my cringe compilation.


    For real though the only people who want this don't understand Nagash. He's quite essentially the most LEGENDARY Legendary Lord there is. He literally had other very major Undead characters serve him as lackies and is basically the ruler of the Underworld. Having him not lead armies is such a terrible idea and completely misses the point of his character.

    but thats the problem. Hes too strong. Same as kroak. I think people are getting caught up on the hero part of Legendary hero, it doesnt have to mean he is less.
    He isn't too strong, hell at some point he nearly kroaked from a single zombie, you don't know enough of his lore if you think he always was "God of Undeath" level threat
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 24,734
    How about no?
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • AxiosXiphosAxiosXiphos Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 6,196
    edited September 24
    Personally this is how I would add him;

    Lord Pack
    LL Neferata
    Bunch of units etc
    At the same time...

    Free Game Update Nagash Lord

    Undead factions (that are aligned to Nagash - so Arkhan but not other tomb kings etc) may now seek to bring back Nagash. If they do x or y objective they may revive & gain Nagash (possibly even replacing them as the faction head) and giving them accesses to some new units with him.

    So what does this achieve;
    1. Nagash can be as powerful as he deserves.
    2. No Nagash running around as a lvl 1 lord getting beaten up by Empire Captains.
    3. Arkhan's entire goal and objective makes sense.
    4. You can decide to join or defeat Nagash as any of the undead lords (depending on the character).
    5. You can only access Nagash in game 3 by either owning the lord pack - or by owning games 1 & 2 ontop (win-win for CA).
    6. Nagash can lead a thematically appropriate undead army - depending on the race you claimed him as.
    7. Perhaps you could also have a Wulfrik style dilemma where you decide to fight him instead and claim his throne.
  • overtaker40overtaker40 Registered Users Posts: 231
    arthadaw said:

    Jote191 said:

    Sorry bro I'm gonna have to add this into my cringe compilation.


    For real though the only people who want this don't understand Nagash. He's quite essentially the most LEGENDARY Legendary Lord there is. He literally had other very major Undead characters serve him as lackies and is basically the ruler of the Underworld. Having him not lead armies is such a terrible idea and completely misses the point of his character.

    but thats the problem. Hes too strong. Same as kroak. I think people are getting caught up on the hero part of Legendary hero, it doesnt have to mean he is less.
    He isn't too strong, hell at some point he nearly kroaked from a single zombie, you don't know enough of his lore if you think he always was "God of Undeath" level threat
    I know he wasnt always, I watched the book of chower video about him and the TKs. But i fail to see the relevance of how week he can be. most of these characters are going to appear at near full strength. wouldnt be much point bringing him into the game if he was gonna be a weak version of himself.
  • Xenos7777Xenos7777 Registered Users Posts: 7,113

    If Nagash sees this, he is going to enslave the soul of whoever wrote or agree with this post.

    Nagash do not serve and he sees everyone (even his commanding elites/officers, Arkhan) but him his slaves.

    Well, legendary heroes in the game aren't always meant to be inferior to their lords in the lore hierarchy. It's more of a game classification. Nagash as a hero could make a degree of sense for Arkhan, as long as it's clear he's the big guy there (like, you can embed Ariel in the army of her heralds, but lorewise she's in charge). Would still be better having him as a lord, but still.
  • arthadawarthadaw Registered Users Posts: 1,092

    arthadaw said:

    Jote191 said:

    Sorry bro I'm gonna have to add this into my cringe compilation.


    For real though the only people who want this don't understand Nagash. He's quite essentially the most LEGENDARY Legendary Lord there is. He literally had other very major Undead characters serve him as lackies and is basically the ruler of the Underworld. Having him not lead armies is such a terrible idea and completely misses the point of his character.

    but thats the problem. Hes too strong. Same as kroak. I think people are getting caught up on the hero part of Legendary hero, it doesnt have to mean he is less.
    He isn't too strong, hell at some point he nearly kroaked from a single zombie, you don't know enough of his lore if you think he always was "God of Undeath" level threat
    I know he wasnt always, I watched the book of chower video about him and the TKs. But i fail to see the relevance of how week he can be. most of these characters are going to appear at near full strength. wouldnt be much point bringing him into the game if he was gonna be a weak version of himself.
    Because it mean that GW/CA can introduce Nagash at whatever powerlevel he can work at

    Not as a weak nearly dead undead nor as the God of Undeath you could become after a long time in your campaign
  • SerPusSerPus Registered Users Posts: 6,222

    No Nagash running around as a lvl 1 lord getting beaten up by Empire Captains.

    With logic like that there shouldn't be that many LLs to begin with.
  • AxiosXiphosAxiosXiphos Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 6,196
    SerPus said:

    No Nagash running around as a lvl 1 lord getting beaten up by Empire Captains.

    With logic like that there shouldn't be that many LLs to begin with.
    While I agree with this sentiment; Nagash is meant to be a literal God. Hell CA/GW thinks the Dragon Emperor is too powerful to be a legendary lord...

  • whitewolf7762whitewolf7762 Registered Users Posts: 53
    edited September 24
    Wait, question, if the dragon emperor won’t be implemented doesn’t that kind of mean Nagash won’t? I mean they’re pretty much the same power level right?
  • SerPusSerPus Registered Users Posts: 6,222

    Nagash is meant to be a literal God.

    That's a lie.
  • Lord_ZarkovLord_Zarkov Registered Users Posts: 395

    SerPus said:

    No Nagash running around as a lvl 1 lord getting beaten up by Empire Captains.

    With logic like that there shouldn't be that many LLs to begin with.
    While I agree with this sentiment; Nagash is meant to be a literal God. Hell CA/GW thinks the Dragon Emperor is too powerful to be a legendary lord...

    Only in the End Times and AoS, and even in the former not until the very end of his campaign book.

    In the 4th Ed playable version he was top end Greater Daemon level and in the Lore he’s fluctuated massively depending on the circumstances. Pre ET the peak of his power was casting the Great Spell of Awakening when he ripped souls away from gods in the aether, but even that was only for a brief period of time and left him pretty exhausted after (hence his defeat by Alcadizzar and the Cof13). He wasn’t anywhere near that level when he fought Sigmar.
  • AxiosXiphosAxiosXiphos Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 6,196
    SerPus said:

    Nagash is meant to be a literal God.

    That's a lie.
    Well that is true - he is actually pretty crap. Literally all he does is lose. Even Kemmler (of all people) craps on him in game. But I was trying to appeal to his fanbase.
Sign In or Register to comment.