could anyone lorewise deafeat archaon after he became everchosen

[Chozer]

i mean hes pretty op after he gathered all the artefacts of chaos. so who could?

[Metal Izanagi]

If we're going strictly by the lore, once Archaon has gathered all of the artifacts and has kicked off The End Times, the only person who had a ghost of a chance of beating him in a duel was that weird Karl Franz/Sigmar mashup, and when the two of them fought it was a stalemate as the world ended.

You can make up any fan fiction you want and that's cool, but if we're going by official, non-retconned lore, Archaon with the artifacts is at most equalled by Sigmar reborn in Karl Franz's body.

[Chozer]

Originally posted by Metal Izanagi:

If we're going strictly by the lore, once Archaon has gathered all of the artifacts and has kicked off The End Times, the only person who had a ghost of a chance of beating him in a duel was that weird Karl Franz/Sigmar mashup, and when the two of them fought it was a stalemate as the world ended.

You can make up any fan fiction you want and that's cool, but if we're going by official, non-retconned lore, Archaon with the artifacts is at most equalled by Sigmar reborn in Karl Franz's body.

Durthu at peak strenght could cleave a greater deamon in half. i think he could beat archan but yeah thats what i mean archaon is litterly power incanate when hes at full power

[ArchAnge1LT]

In the rules, he was top 3 best fighter in the game. So i dont know where all this "a lot" could beat him comes from.

From lore perspective, discussion is void, cause he won.

[Cacomistle]

Originally posted by ArchAnge1LT:

In the rules, he was top 3 best fighter in the game. So i dont know where all this "a lot" could beat him comes from.

From lore perspective, discussion is void, cause he won.

He didn't win on his own though. Saying he won shows he had the best army or was the best military commander (or that the skaven wiped out the lizards and nagash by themselves, probably forgetting a few factions, and helped with everything else, and mannfred backstabbed the heros before they could stop Archaeon).

Thats like saying a skaven clanrat is the best fighter from a lore perspective. Cause this skaven clanrat didn't die during the end times, and all the heros did. He won too.

The rules from my understanding seemed different than what the lore would indicate for character strength. Character rules have to be balanced, cause if a character can wipe out an army by themselves (as many characters can in lore) then they're just an auto win. But honestly the lore doesn't seem that consistent in the first place, cause a lot of characters do stuff that makes them seem ridiculous. So tabletop rules might be the best way to go anyways. I know this game's balance is not fully accurate to the lore, but he beats every character who doesn't get a monstrous mount or isn't a monster.

[ArchAnge1LT]

Originally posted by Cacomistle:

Originally posted by ArchAnge1LT:

In the rules, he was top 3 best fighter in the game. So i dont know where all this "a lot" could beat him comes from.

From lore perspective, discussion is void, cause he won.

He didn't win on his own though. Saying he won shows he had the best army or was the best military commander (or that the skaven wiped out the lizards and nagash by themselves, probably forgetting a few factions, and helped with everything else, and mannfred backstabbed the heros before they could stop Archaeon).

Thats like saying a skaven clanrat is the best fighter from a lore perspective. Cause this skaven clanrat didn't die during the end times, and all the heros did. He won too.

The rules from my understanding seemed different than what the lore would indicate for character strength. Character rules have to be balanced, cause if a character can wipe out an army by themselves (as many characters can in lore) then they're just an auto win. But honestly the lore doesn't seem that consistent in the first place, cause a lot of characters do stuff that makes them seem ridiculous. So tabletop rules might be the best way to go anyways. I know this game's balance is not fully accurate to the lore, but he beats every character who doesn't get a monstrous mount or isn't a monster.

Well said.

Rules were kinda different from the lore in some cases, but they for sure tried to somewhat convey the power of the individual in them. So it is somewhat reliable source for what it is worth.

Evaluating lorewise is difficult, cause it is inconsistent, unreliable or as you said, over the top, depending on when and where that lore came from.

[Cacomistle]

Originally posted by ArchAnge1LT:

Originally posted by Cacomistle:

He didn't win on his own though. Saying he won shows he had the best army or was the best military commander (or that the skaven wiped out the lizards and nagash by themselves, probably forgetting a few factions, and helped with everything else, and mannfred backstabbed the heros before they could stop Archaeon).

Thats like saying a skaven clanrat is the best fighter from a lore perspective. Cause this skaven clanrat didn't die during the end times, and all the heros did. He won too.

The rules from my understanding seemed different than what the lore would indicate for character strength. Character rules have to be balanced, cause if a character can wipe out an army by themselves (as many characters can in lore) then they're just an auto win. But honestly the lore doesn't seem that consistent in the first place, cause a lot of characters do stuff that makes them seem ridiculous. So tabletop rules might be the best way to go anyways. I know this game's balance is not fully accurate to the lore, but he beats every character who doesn't get a monstrous mount or isn't a monster.

Well said.

Rules were kinda different from the lore in some cases, but they for sure tried to convey somewhat the power of the individual in them. So it is somewhat reliable source for what it is worth.

Evaluating lorewise is difficult, cause it is inconsistent, unreliable or as you said, or over the top, depending on when and where that lore came from.

Out of curiosity, you said he was top 3. Who were the people who could beat him?

And also I think characters that could be missed out are casters. Someone like mazdamundi in the lore seemed to be able to annihilate everything. But casting can't feasibly be that powerful. If he had the magical power to just insta kill a lord that would be stupid balance wise, which means Archaeon would reach melee combat and just crush him presumably. All the characters that I think seem like they could beat him in lore are caster characters, who have to be weaker than their lore indicates whereas physical characters don't have to be weaker by as much.

[ChaosKhan]

Fluff wise, Tyrion is about the strongest (obvious) warrior in the whole Warhammer world. If one could certainly beat Archaon (and every other character while we are at it), it would by Tyrion.

There is also Walach Harkon, the Grand Master of the Blood Knights (still waiting for him to be added to the game... -_-). He defeated Karl Franz in a duel and later also Manfred, very fast and very one sidedly. In Fact, he was defeated by his own zombie dragon ripping him to shreds because otherwise the lore would be hard pressed to find a way to kill this monster. There is only one vampire in existance who is stronger than him...

Now, there are some "hidden" characters which were lore wise so overpowered, that they had to be kept away in order for Chaos to win in End Times, like Abhorash. This guy is probably the strongest fighter to have ever (un)lived and quite probably noone on the chaos side would be able to even entertain this guy before beeing slaughtered brutally. Before people start to call for Kholek, this guy was killed by Settra 1v1 in End Times, and Settra is far from Abhorashs level. He defeated a great dragon in "early" stage of his vampiric life 1v1 and became even more badass after drinking the beasts blood. I know, now in the game it's nothing big to beat a dragon with a lord, but in the lore it's actually pretty much a very big deal to beat a "great dragon" (therefore either a star or a moon dragon) just with your swordarm.
The other one is Gilles le Breton (Green Knight), basically the brettonian Sigmar equivalent. He actually fought Abhorash on about equal footing. He also had to be "separated" form the last battle against Archaon so the lore could actually come to a logical conclusion.
Honestly, Abhorash und Gilles alone would have slaughtered absolutely everything there on their own. They basically die only because the world... well... desintegrates...

Now, regarding Malekith, he is like a weaker Teclis and a weaker Tyrion combined into one person. He is probably the most accomplished fighter overall, but he isn't at the peak at either magic or melee. That's why he wouldn't be able to beat Archaon 1v1 in a physical fight.

[ArchAnge1LT]

Originally posted by Cacomistle:

Originally posted by ArchAnge1LT:

Well said.

Rules were kinda different from the lore in some cases, but they for sure tried to convey somewhat the power of the individual in them. So it is somewhat reliable source for what it is worth.

Evaluating lorewise is difficult, cause it is inconsistent, unreliable or as you said, or over the top, depending on when and where that lore came from.

Out of curiosity, you said he was top 3. Who were the people who could beat him?

And also I think characters that could be missed out are casters. Someone like mazdamundi in the lore seemed to be able to annihilate everything. But casting can't feasibly be that powerful. If he had the magical power to just insta kill a lord that would be stupid balance wise, which means Archaeon would reach melee combat and just crush him presumably. All the characters that I think seem like they could beat him in lore are caster characters, who have to be weaker than their lore indicates whereas physical characters don't have to be weaker by as much.

Rules-wise? Depending on editions, overall, it would be Tyrion that could go on par, and probably some would argue various points on Grimgor, Thorgrim, Helebron for the third place.

[Darbie]

I feel like Nagash would have Hand of Dust turned him into an undead servant with a single cast, then been like "Turn your hordes on the Chaos gods, I wish them off of my world."

But I haven't paid that much attention to WH Lore for a long time, so I could be off-base.

[A_COOC]

Originally posted by ArchAnge1LT:

Originally posted by Cacomistle:

Out of curiosity, you said he was top 3. Who were the people who could beat him?

And also I think characters that could be missed out are casters. Someone like mazdamundi in the lore seemed to be able to annihilate everything. But casting can't feasibly be that powerful. If he had the magical power to just insta kill a lord that would be stupid balance wise, which means Archaeon would reach melee combat and just crush him presumably. All the characters that I think seem like they could beat him in lore are caster characters, who have to be weaker than their lore indicates whereas physical characters don't have to be weaker by as much.

Rules-wise? Depending on editions, overall, it would be Tyrion that could go on par, and probably some would argue various points on Grimgor, Thorgrim, Helebron for the third place.

I think personally the reason he isn't the greatest fighter is because of his Norscan bloodlust mentioned in one of the books and because he's a human with gifts from the gods. While there are others who are inherently stronger due to their race who also share similar gifts (though obviously not on the exact scale of Archaon because he has more) . So even if it's one of the most skilled ones, he's compensating for being human compared to some foes. Even with all his fancy gifts.

[Red Shift]

Originally posted by ChaosKhan:

Now, there are some "hidden" characters which were lore wise so overpowered, that they had to be kept away in order for Chaos to win in End Times, l

End Times wasnt my era for TT/lore, but wasnt Gotrek removed from the whole world via promotion to extra-dimensional chaos-slaying god, with extra powerful axes, in order to take him out of the equation?

[Chozer]

Originally posted by ChaosKhan:

Fluff wise, Tyrion is about the strongest (obvious) warrior in the whole Warhammer world. If one could certainly beat Archaon (and every other character while we are at it), it would by Tyrion.

There is also Walach Harkon, the Grand Master of the Blood Knights (still waiting for him to be added to the game... -_-). He defeated Karl Franz in a duel and later also Manfred, very fast and very one sidedly. In Fact, he was defeated by his own zombie dragon ripping him to shreds because otherwise the lore would be hard pressed to find a way to kill this monster. There is only one vampire in existance who is stronger than him...

Now, there are some "hidden" characters which were lore wise so overpowered, that they had to be kept away in order for Chaos to win in End Times, like Abhorash. This guy is probably the strongest fighter to have ever (un)lived and quite probably noone on the chaos side would be able to even entertain this guy before beeing slaughtered brutally. Before people start to call for Kholek, this guy was killed by Settra 1v1 in End Times, and Settra is far from Abhorashs level. He defeated a great dragon in "early" stage of his vampiric life 1v1 and became even more badass after drinking the beasts blood. I know, now in the game it's nothing big to beat a dragon with a lord, but in the lore it's actually pretty much a very big deal to beat a "great dragon" (therefore either a star or a moon dragon) just with your swordarm.
The other one is Gilles le Breton (Green Knight), basically the brettonian Sigmar equivalent. He actually fought Abhorash on about equal footing. He also had to be "separated" form the last battle against Archaon so the lore could actually come to a logical conclusion.
Honestly, Abhorash und Gilles alone would have slaughtered absolutely everything there on their own. They basically die only because the world... well... desintegrates...

Now, regarding Malekith, he is like a weaker Teclis and a weaker Tyrion combined into one person. He is probably the most accomplished fighter overall, but he isn't at the peak at either magic or melee. That's why he wouldn't be able to beat Archaon 1v1 in a physical fight.

yeah but then they could just have added in the father ogre to kill all those hidden characters

[Chozer]

Originally posted by 🎀 A_COCO 🎀:

Originally posted by ArchAnge1LT:

Rules-wise? Depending on editions, overall, it would be Tyrion that could go on par, and probably some would argue various points on Grimgor, Thorgrim, Helebron for the third place.

I think personally the reason he isn't the greatest fighter is because of his Norscan bloodlust mentioned in one of the books and because he's a human with gifts from the gods. While there are others who are inherently stronger due to their race who also share similar gifts (though obviously not on the exact scale of Archaon because he has more) . So even if it's one of the most skilled ones, he's compensating for being human compared to some foes. Even with all his fancy gifts.

dont think hes much human at the end times. since he can see though time with the eye of plot. and the armor of plot makes him unkillable pretty much. and then he gets the speed and power multiplied of a greater deamon when using the full power of the slayer of plots. and then combine all that with the crown of all plots and the mark of chaos undivided and all the blessings of the dark gods

[A_COOC]

Originally posted by Defect:

Originally posted by 🎀 A_COCO 🎀:

I think personally the reason he isn't the greatest fighter is because of his Norscan bloodlust mentioned in one of the books and because he's a human with gifts from the gods. While there are others who are inherently stronger due to their race who also share similar gifts (though obviously not on the exact scale of Archaon because he has more) . So even if it's one of the most skilled ones, he's compensating for being human compared to some foes. Even with all his fancy gifts.

dont think hes much human at the end times. since he can see though time with the eye of plot. and the armor of plot makes him unkillable pretty much. and then he gets the speed and power multiplied of a greater deamon when using the full power of the slayer of plots. and then combine all that with the crown of all plots and the mark of chaos undivided and all the blessings of the dark gods

He's human at the baseline, that's my point. He's not as strong as say Krog-gar because he has a weaker baseline as a human compared to other race's greatest warriors.

[Chozer]

Originally posted by 🎀 A_COCO 🎀:

Originally posted by Defect:

dont think hes much human at the end times. since he can see though time with the eye of plot. and the armor of plot makes him unkillable pretty much. and then he gets the speed and power multiplied of a greater deamon when using the full power of the slayer of plots. and then combine all that with the crown of all plots and the mark of chaos undivided and all the blessings of the dark gods

He's human at the baseline, that's my point. He's not as strong as say Krog-gar because he has a weaker baseline as a human compared to other race's greatest warriors.

if just he did hes 100 push ups sit ups and squads while on his dark quest...

Originally posted by 🎀 A_COCO 🎀:

Originally posted by Defect:

dont think hes much human at the end times. since he can see though time with the eye of plot. and the armor of plot makes him unkillable pretty much. and then he gets the speed and power multiplied of a greater deamon when using the full power of the slayer of plots. and then combine all that with the crown of all plots and the mark of chaos undivided and all the blessings of the dark gods

He's human at the baseline, that's my point. He's not as strong as say Krog-gar because he has a weaker baseline as a human compared to other race's greatest warriors.