About heroes, mounts and GH17 ... (Compendium)

[GorbadIronClaw]

Hi you all!

Lets go straight to the point:

GH17 pag 117

"Some heroes have a mount, such as
a battle steed, a powerful monster
that they can ride, or a massive war
machine that they can stand upon. In
all such cases, any command abilities
or magical artefacts can only be used
to affect attacks made by the hero,
and have no effect on attacks made
by the their mount unless specifically
stated otherwise."

Now Azhag compium´s profile:

"Get on Wiv It!: If Azhag the Slaughterer
uses this ability, select a single unit of
Orruks within 18". Until your next hero
phase you can add 1 to all hit, run and
charge rolls made by this unit."

 

My question: Can we consider this a case where the commad ability specifically states the mount benefits from it if Azhag uses that on himself?

 

 

 

[Malakree]

https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Compendiums/warhammer-aos-orcs-and-goblins-en.pdf

Azhag isn't actually in the compendium anymore. If you are using the model the correct warscroll is a Warboss on Wyvern

Also it specifically refers to artefacts (and command TRAITS) not abilities, so things like battlebrew and the Ironjawz +1 on charge.

[Skabnoze]

In regards to this rule, is the pet squig for the Moonclan Warboss considered a mount?  My assumption would be yes, but I feel like it is an interesting enough case to still ask since the pet is treated simply as a different weapon type and does not appear to effect any of the Warboss' stats otherwise.

[Malakree]

23 minutes ago, Skabnoze said:

In regards to this rule, is the pet squig for the Moonclan Warboss considered a mount?  My assumption would be yes, but I feel like it is an interesting enough case to still ask since the pet is treated simply as a different weapon type and does not appear to effect any of the Warboss' stats otherwise.

In my opinion it would count in the same way as a mount. Specifically because the warscroll states "Accompanied by a huge..." this means that the squig and the hero are actually two separate entities sharing a base, in the same way that a mount would be. The rule states

6 hours ago, GorbadIronClaw said:

any command abilities or magical artefacts can only be used to affect attacks made by the hero,

So the Hero, the warboss, isn't actually making the Maw attack, the squig is. Using Battlebrew as an example, if the Warboss drinks it then the squig isn't getting the effect, same as a mount wouldn't.

It's an unfortunate casualty of war but it's pretty clear IMO.

EDIT: If on the other hand the warscroll said

Quote

The Grot Warboss may instead carry a magical Moon-prodder to blast their foes from afar and a Giant Cave Squig who devours their foes

I would say that the cave squig is then directly attached to the warboss and thus "part" of the hero. It's me arguing semantics but you can see the thought process.

[Skabnoze]

That was my thought as well.  I was just unaware if they had made a ruling one way or another for characters with pets as there are a couple of them out there.

[Malakree]

5 minutes ago, Skabnoze said:

That was my thought as well.  I was just unaware if they had made a ruling one way or another for characters with pets as there are a couple of them out there.

It's a pretty edge case tbh. Most pets add additional rules/special attacks and don't make up a core part of the heroes damage output.

[GorbadIronClaw]

22 hours ago, Malakree said:

https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Compendiums/warhammer-aos-orcs-and-goblins-en.pdf

Azhag isn't actually in the compendium anymore. If you are using the model the correct warscroll is a Warboss on Wyvern

Also it specifically refers to artefacts (and command TRAITS) not abilities, so things like battlebrew and the Ironjawz +1 on charge.

Mmm...no. Read it again, it saids command ABILITIES. So I still keep my question  

I do know that about Azhag, but we are old school players and given the fact that the "old" compendium is GW´s official material, we play it at the same time that we apply the GH17 rules. This question pop out in our last o&g vs cw match, and I would like to know if the comunity  see this situation as an example of "specifically stated otherwise" because the scroll´s command ability says "to all hit, run and charge rolls made by this unit."

 

 

[Imperial]

23 minutes ago, GorbadIronClaw said:

Mmm...no. Read it again, it saids command ABILITIES. So I still keep my question  

Mmm... yes. Read GHB faq 

[GorbadIronClaw]

Thanks a lot! Didn´t read the last faq, my fault