Jump to content

Legions of Nagash FAQ Compilation Thread.


yarrickson

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Undeadly said:

That remains to be FAQ'd; if it only applies to the Vampire Queen, its considerably less powerful, but if its the entire Throne, it is incredibly strong. But I assume they'll just limit it to the Vampire Queen.

The conve throne it's better described this time:

The vampire queen it's mounted on a Coven throne

attended by two Pallid Handmaindes --->>> and it's the vamprie queen to be attended by

and protected by a swirling spirit.---> as the nadmaindens.

And even considering the coven throne the subjects are not attacks brought by the mount. And here it's specified better.

This obviously considering logic and grammar, but not necessary what GW can say.

 

So I think it's better to clarify it once for all 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 180
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, deynon said:

The conve throne it's better described this time:

The vampire queen it's mounted on a Coven throne

attended by two Pallid Handmaindes --->>> and it's the vamprie queen to be attended by

and protected by a swirling spirit.---> as the nadmaindens.

And even considering the coven throne the subjects are not attacks brought by the mount. And here it's specified better.

This obviously considering logic and grammar, but not necessary what GW can say.

 

So I think it's better to clarify it once for all 

Ah, than yeah, it only effects the Queen's Sword and her Bite. Considering the Spirit Hosts still MW, its not that big a loss.

Also, it would have been much easier if they just called it "Vampire Queen on Coven Throne".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Undeadly said:

Ah, than yeah, it only effects the Queen's Sword and her Bite. Considering the Spirit Hosts still MW, its not that big a loss.

Also, it would have been much easier if they just called it "Vampire Queen on Coven Throne".

you'd lose 8 Attack of the haindmaidens, quite a bit of loss, and anyway that trait it's not the only thing that can affect it overall, including also the ghosts.

In can't be Vampire Queen on Coven Throne cause doesn't exist  a vampire queen, only vampire lord. It's silly, but it's as it's working GW. Prince Vhordrai its already a strange exception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Sunchaser said:

If no save then skip the first part of the other comment. Roll for deathless minions > roll for ceaseless > deathless minions on morghast

I disagree.  "Unsavable" means unsavable.  No saves OF ANY KIND. 

That wasn't the question though, the question was whether he could pass them.  It's a better question but I still think no.  It's in the same genre as an instant kill spell.  It's done.  It happens no matter what.  You can't pass unsabale wounds, you can't pass dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Vextol said:

I disagree.  "Unsavable" means unsavable.  No saves OF ANY KIND. 

That wasn't the question though, the question was whether he could pass them.  It's a better question but I still think no.  It's in the same genre as an instant kill spell.  It's done.  It happens no matter what.  You can't pass unsabale wounds, you can't pass dead.

Agree with you on this one Vex.   After studying the warscroll closely, it is quite clear that you aren't allowed to do anything to mitigate, prevent or modify the wounds.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, AverageBoss said:

Point 4 allows it, and that is the way they have been run for awhile. Everchosen includes several Everchosen battalions that are impossible to run with Everchosen units for example. Its the reason why you see Fatesworn Warband run in StD, DoT, and GA:C lists.

image1.JPG.b104639ba887eea61d9a9a72b22db

The debate from my understanding isn't whether or not the units can be part of a specific allegiance.

It's whether or not the warscroll battalion itself is part of that allegiance or not. For example, if you are running Fatesworn and you choose a TZEENTCH allegiance. All the warscrolls are TZEENTCH and hence meet the allegiance requirements. But does the points for Fatesworn have to come out of your allies or not? Because Fatesworn is an EVERCHOSEN warscroll battalion, not a TZEENTCH one.

 

personally am on the side that I think it's a bit silly that the battalion cost would come out of your allies. 

 

But if it is the case, then the Legions have the issue in that none of them are allies with the other (it's redundant, since they can all take the same models anyway). Certainly I think it's worthwhile for Games Workshop to clear up the intent in any case as it's obviously a question people aren't sure about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, TheKingInYellow said:

Again reallocating is none of those things.

Actually, reallocating is a form of mitigation.:D

That aside, you aren't getting a concrete answer to this because it's a unique case.  Closest you can get is direct wording and that the FAQ says the wounds cannot be modified at all in any way (including by a stonehorn whose ability, at the time, took place after damage was already distributed). 

Reallocation is modification but you could argue if you wanted.  If I was a death player and I got hit with skarbrand I would never argue that I could reallocate to another unit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, in the new book, am I right in assuming that if I choose a Legion/Grand Host allegiance, the only possible allies are F-E Courts?  Is this to stop people from choosing a legion (eg Sacrament), not picking up the applicable Mortarch as general, then allying in a different Mortarch as a different legion/GA death ally?

The new allegiance rules seem very restrictive for army building, where if I want to put Arkhan in my army, but still want a command trait, I'd have to run GA Death or GH Nagash. I was also hoping for more warscroll battalions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ZephyrExia said:

So, in the new book, am I right in assuming that if I choose a Legion/Grand Host allegiance, the only possible allies are F-E Courts?  Is this to stop people from choosing a legion (eg Sacrament), not picking up the applicable Mortarch as general, then allying in a different Mortarch as a different legion/GA death ally?

The new allegiance rules seem very restrictive for army building, where if I want to put Arkhan in my army, but still want a command trait, I'd have to run GA Death or GH Nagash. I was also hoping for more warscroll battalions.

You have at your disposal allegiance Grand Host, Grand Allegiance Death, Soulblight in the Legion of Nagash Batletome. NIghthunt and FEC in the GH2017.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 6:06 PM, yarrickson said:

Well I can answer 2) for you now. As a Deathmage the Necromancer gets to know one spell from the Lore of the Deathmages because he is in the Legion of Sacrament. He has no innate ability granting him another. Save for the Dark Acolyte Command Trait I also see no other way to change that.

 

Unless I have misunderstood you, this is not accurate. I don't have my book in front of me, but (I'm 95% sure) the page of LoN describing the new Lores expressly says each Deathmages, Vampire, or Deathlord, wizard gets to know spells from the appropriate lores. This is innate to each of those wizards now. The Legion of Sacrament gives each wizard in the Legion an extra spell beyond that.

 

On ‎2‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 1:11 AM, Lord Veshnakar said:

So the Legion of Sacrament is the only way to access either of the two new lores? That seems off to me.

I agree with this guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would add two questions :)

1) Are Vargheists really no longer "Battleline if Soulblight", or was that change an accident? (Probably not an accident, but it seems like a harsh and unnecessary nerf.)

2) You do need to set aside reserve points for The Master's Teachings, right? (Or if I've misnamed it - the Legion of Sacrament thing that gives you a chance to bring back certain dead units under rare conditions... and feels kinda hard to use right now.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Iskander said:

Unless I have misunderstood you, this is not accurate. I don't have my book in front of me, but (I'm 95% sure) the page of LoN describing the new Lores expressly says each Deathmages, Vampire, or Deathlord, wizard gets to know spells from the appropriate lores. This is innate to each of those wizards now. The Legion of Sacrament gives each wizard in the Legion an extra spell beyond that.

 

I agree with this guy.

Yarrickson is absolutely correct.  Go back and read the rules carefully.  Relevant rules are below.

WIZARDS THAT (emphasis mine) know an additional spell (or spells) from one of the Lores of the Dead, as described in their army's allegiance abilities (again emphasis mine), generate their spells from the following tables.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Iskander said:

Unless I have misunderstood you, this is not accurate. I don't have my book in front of me, but (I'm 95% sure) the page of LoN describing the new Lores expressly says each Deathmages, Vampire, or Deathlord, wizard gets to know spells from the appropriate lores. This is innate to each of those wizards now. The Legion of Sacrament gives each wizard in the Legion an extra spell beyond that.

 

I agree with this guy.

As already clarified above (and also already clarified a page ago, immediately after the post you quote) Wizards in the Grand Legion and the 3 lesser legions all get access to lore of deathmages/vampires as appropriate as do Soulblight, but only for Lore of vampires. 

Other than 1 Sacrament command trait there is no mechanism I have seen that gets you more spells from the Lores save taking more wizards. 

A lot of confusion seems to have originated from the Legion of Sacrament preview which indicated that Sacrament wizards knew extra spells, which is only true when comparing them to wizards in a GA:Death allegiance army and not when comparing them to the other legions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, someone2040 said:

The debate from my understanding isn't whether or not the units can be part of a specific allegiance.

It's whether or not the warscroll battalion itself is part of that allegiance or not. For example, if you are running Fatesworn and you choose a TZEENTCH allegiance. All the warscrolls are TZEENTCH and hence meet the allegiance requirements. But does the points for Fatesworn have to come out of your allies or not? Because Fatesworn is an EVERCHOSEN warscroll battalion, not a TZEENTCH one.

 

personally am on the side that I think it's a bit silly that the battalion cost would come out of your allies. 

 

But if it is the case, then the Legions have the issue in that none of them are allies with the other (it's redundant, since they can all take the same models anyway). Certainly I think it's worthwhile for Games Workshop to clear up the intent in any case as it's obviously a question people aren't sure about.

There is no debate.  I'll use the easiest example of Guardians of Alarielle.  It includes a number of Stormcast units.  For the purposes of army construction and determining allegiance, those Stormcast units gain the Sylvaneth keyword.  They do not benefit from Sylvaneth allegiance abilities.  This is described clearly in GHB 2017.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, yarrickson said:

As already clarified above (and also already clarified a page ago, immediately after the post you quote) Wizards in the Grand Legion and the 3 lesser legions all get access to lore of deathmages/vampires as appropriate as do Soulblight, but only for Lore of vampires. 

Other than 1 Sacrament command trait there is no mechanism I have seen that gets you more spells from the Lords save taking more wizards. 

A lot of confusion seems to have originated from the Legion of Sacrament preview which indicated that Sacrament wizards knew extra spells, which is only true when comparing them to wizards in a GA:Death allegiance army and not when comparing them to the other legions.

Well, my mistake. Thanks for clearing it up :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a rule on page 95 (numbered point 4, final sentence) of the Disciples of Tzeentch Battletome allowing a Battalion to have the allegiance of a keyword shared by all of its contents - so Fatesworn can be Tzeentch for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...