View Full Version : Necrachs or else

31-10-2005, 20:28
I have recently bought the vampire counts army book but have had trouble writing a 1000pt army list.The key phrase that I am finding unhelpful is for choosing generals. It is: "Necromancers and Necrach vampire thralls with the nehekara noble blood power can be general of the army." I was fine with this, but a friend argued that you can give Necromancers bloodlines. I thought this was a bit odd, as they're not vampires, but if so then does this mean your general can be
A) a Necromancer or a thrall which is necrach or
B) a Necromancer which is a necrach, or a thrall as above.
If it is option B, then the army must be Necrach, which doesn't make sense, but my friend is sure. Which is correct?:confused:

31-10-2005, 20:42
Only vampires may take bloodlines, as only vampires have bloodlines listed as an option in their unit entry.

31-10-2005, 20:46
As said. Necromancers can't take bloodline abilities.

31-10-2005, 20:48
I would assume that the reference to bloodlines apply to the thrall only. By taking the Bloodline power the character is allowed to be the General.

The Necromancer is already capable of raising dead and controlling the Undead.

Edit: A bit late, but that should solve it. ^


31-10-2005, 20:49
Its option A. Your general MUST be a wizard so you can have either a) a necromancer (lvl 1 or 2) or b) a Nechrach Thrall (who MUST have noble blood to become a wizard). Nechrach thralls aren't as magically powerful as a necromancer, but are much tougher characters. I suggest going with a necromancer, unless you have a real trouble keeping your general alive (in which case a ward save is better anyway), don't care about magic much, or need the extra LD from your general to keep Ghouls in check.

As for the second part, necromancers are not vampires, thus they may not take Nechrach abilities.