Jump to content

Lets Chat Wanderers / Wood Elves compendium


warhammernerd

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, adreal said:

I'm hopeful we get a faction focus, I keep on mentioning it on Facebook, so maybe.

 

I would like our alliegnece abilites to be clear in the new generals handbook

I too am hoping for this. Short of more standard Aelves, this would suffice! Doesn't appear that any of the Aelf factions will be getting bonuses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was an interesting read that the Dispossessed will be getting Ironbreakers as battleline in a pure Dispossessed list.

I can't see any battleline changes for us though. I think that the "battleline if" options are quite accessible for us. I have used SotW as battleline for a good few games. It won't be too much of a bummer taking a Waywatcher as the general if the Nomad Prince can still use his command ability.

With the new dispelling system, our Spell Weaver is going to be a beast! :D 30" autodispel! 

@Aelfric- What re-wording are you hoping for regarding our allegiance abiltiies/artefacts, out of curiosity? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gwill_of_the_Woods said:

...

@Aelfric- What re-wording are you hoping for regarding our allegiance abiltiies/artefacts, out of curiosity? 

 

For me it would be if Realm Wanderers (and all it's variations) are counted as moves or not for Waywatchers, SotW, and Eternal Guard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, GM_Monkey said:

For me it would be if Realm Wanderers (and all it's variations) are counted as moves or not for Waywatchers, SotW, and Eternal Guard.

@Gwill_of_the_Woods Ditto.  Just to add that in my local store using "Realm Wanderers" does not count as a move, but it would be nice to have the clarification if I ever find myself battling elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gwill_of_the_Woods said:

I thought it read "this is your units move for that movement phase".

I've been treating it as a movement, but still able to shoot and charge. The unit is actually moving/ making a movement in the movement phase.

 

 

Here is where the controversy starts. The description of the ability talks of " removing the unit/s" and "setting up the unit". Now, even if at the end of it the rule says to consider this as the "unit's movement", "the set-up" is not considered as a movement, as movement includes: 1- Movement: using the unit's move characteristic to bring the models from a point to another on the battlefield; 2-pile-in; move the models up to 3" toward the closest enemy model when two units are within 3" of themselves; 3- run: inclusive of running and retreat/flee.

The set-up has been explained and defined in an FAQ in January (if I am not mistaken, maybe December) as NOT a movement as a movement cannot bring your units within 3" of n enemy unit (and from here the possibility of "set-up" units within 3" of enemy units but this is a different topic...). 

All this said, considering the explanation given in hyndsight in the FAQ, I think what initially whoever worded this ability wanted to say was: "...if a unit decides to do so, then it cannot make a further movement" rather than "this count as this unit's movement" implying movement as an action taken for that movement phase rather that an actual movement. 

Of course this is just my POV of the problem and although I think all of us would have liked GW to further explain/fix this dispute, I think we are better off waiting what AoS 2.0 brings us hoping with all our beings and praying almighty Alarielle that this time they will give us rules less open to personal interpretation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha. point taken. I didn't realise it was open to so much interpretation.

They really do need to be precise with their wording. I am sure that they will make it clearer in AoS2.0.

We as a gaming group are holding off playing games temporarily and focussing on painting new untis in preparation.

My new stuff is building a Deepkin army, which will be fleshed out by Wanderers allies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a little disappointed, I was hoping for a separate faction focus like the Dispossessed and Free People got, not to be lumped in with the rest of the fractured Aelf factions. At least we get some points reductions but nothing really new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not too much new info, though it was good to hear confirmed that point reductions are coming. The main reason I was hoping for a faction focus of our own was so we would we get a longer lore section. Quite excited to get my hands on the new core book to see if we get any new lore in the Wanderers section there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A fierce and noble tribe of nomads, the Wanderers are heirs to an ancient shame, having abandoned Ghyran to Nurgle during the Age of Chaos and letting the ley lines that link the sacred places of the Mortal Realms be broken. Now, they fight as scouts and guerilla strike forces for the free cities, attacking with stealth and speed, tearing apart their chosen quarry in disciplined volleys of arrows.

 

was this known? I didn't know they'd been there since we never read anything about this.. and treelord (presumably existing for ages already) would probably have been alive then...

 

Anyway: if executioners from covens get a reduction then the rangers will at least get the same reduction (but preferably a bit more since they are way more niche and even they aren't as point effective).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we got was pretty much what everyone else got.  I wasn't expecting any great reveals, just glad for the points reductions.  I am interested to see what the changes to the mechanics are, though; hopefully clearer wording.  I am also keen to read any new lore for Wanderers, but I don't think there will be much of it.  I know I will have to paint more Wanderers, but I haven't got a clue what, so I shall carry on painting Idoneth until the GHB comes out. 

If Idoneth are the last faction focus, I am curious as to what they are going to reveal in the next couple of weeks.  

(Also slightly disappointed that there's been no mention of Greenskins, but oh well)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Aezeal said:

A fierce and noble tribe of nomads, the Wanderers are heirs to an ancient shame, having abandoned Ghyran to Nurgle during the Age of Chaos and letting the ley lines that link the sacred places of the Mortal Realms be broken. Now, they fight as scouts and guerilla strike forces for the free cities, attacking with stealth and speed, tearing apart their chosen quarry in disciplined volleys of arrows.

 

was this known? I didn't know they'd been there since we never read anything about this.. and treelord (presumably existing for ages already) would probably have been alive then...

 

Anyway: if executioners from covens get a reduction then the rangers will at least get the same reduction (but preferably a bit more since they are way more niche and even they aren't as point effective).

All I know is what's written in the Order:Grand Alliance book.  l thought that all the races spread across the realms during the Age of Myth and it was during the Age of Chaos that the Wanderers, along with many others of Order, retreated to Azyr before it was sealed against Chaos.  They then returned to the Realms at the start of the Age of Sigmar to reclaim them from the forces of Chaos.  There aim was to strengthen and restore the ley lines, but this is the first mention, as far as I know, that they are held responsible for them being broken in the first place.  Personally, I reckon this is propaganda given out by Allarielle and the Sylvaneth, as She believes the Wanderers abandoned them when they left.  

I hope that Waystones are still being created in the updated lore, but it is slightly worrying that it wasn't mentioned.   It's a part of the lore I've created round my tribe (in the absence of anything official).  At least we are linked to the ley lines in some way still.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aezeal said:

A fierce and noble tribe of nomads, the Wanderers are heirs to an ancient shame, having abandoned Ghyran to Nurgle during the Age of Chaos and letting the ley lines that link the sacred places of the Mortal Realms be broken. Now, they fight as scouts and guerilla strike forces for the free cities, attacking with stealth and speed, tearing apart their chosen quarry in disciplined volleys of arrows.

 

was this known? I didn't know they'd been there since we never read anything about this.. and treelord (presumably existing for ages already) would probably have been alive then...

 

Anyway: if executioners from covens get a reduction then the rangers will at least get the same reduction (but preferably a bit more since they are way more niche and even they aren't as point effective).

it is mentioned in the sylvaneth battletome. when nurgle attacked ghyran, the former woodelves abandoned their posts, because they thought nurgle only wants to fight alarielle and the sylvaneth and that chaos would spare them. however, after their betrayal they were banned from all sylvaneth wood and lost their homes, hence being known as "wanderers" instead of woodelves now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, tea_wild_owl said:

it is mentioned in the sylvaneth battletome. when nurgle attacked ghyran, the former woodelves abandoned their posts, because they thought nurgle only wants to fight alarielle and the sylvaneth and that chaos would spare them. however, after their betrayal they were banned from all sylvaneth wood and lost their homes, hence being known as "wanderers" instead of woodelves now.

It's a nice story element but its a bad call by GW in my opinion as I want to play wood elves not wanderers. I want an elven army with a strong affinity toward nature and especially woodlands. GW just stopped me doing that despite painting over 200 models in a woodland themes from 8th ed days...I hope they reverse it soon. Sylvaneth are weaker outside their own alleigance armies so allying them in to theme my army more like the old days isn't very efficient but at least it's possible. 

I'm glad the points are coming down and I agree Rangers should come down more than executioners as Azeal already mentions. Wild riders also need to come down in price when compared to Gore Gruntas they are shockingly unimpressive. Cheaper Glade guard would make battle line a lot easier to fill and leave more for more those elite units we struggle to squeeze in and I really hope Sisters of the watch come down more and we can use them as battle line because "Loose until the last" and "Melt away" make them  strong compared to other shooters in the game and really strengthen the wood elf/wanderer style of combat. Looking forward to the changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I don't know any points or anything like that, the fact we will get point drops, it makes me happy that I might be able to field waystone pathfinders with nice blocks of 30 glade guard and keep in my unit of reavers with wild riders supporting them 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, GM_Monkey said:

I'm a little disappointed, I was hoping for a separate faction focus like the Dispossessed and Free People got, not to be lumped in with the rest of the fractured Aelf factions. At least we get some points reductions but nothing really new.

Yeah, it's not very encouraging, lumping all the broken/undeveloped Aelf factions together reinforces the impression that they don't intend to do anything with these factions, it makes them seem very much an afterthought. Still, at least we know there will be points reductions in the new GHB which means we get to take more models we like and might stop Wanderers from becoming even less competitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Wanderers did well in the new Faction Focus. We can keep our battalion "Waystone Pathfinders" and all our Alliance abilities. Plus the points cost reductions. If Glade Guard (for example) are given a reduction in cost and a horde bonus,  ambushing elite units with our Arcane Bodkins will be even more devastating!
I like the explanation of the fluff, the Wanderer's shame, and how open this faction is too whatever theme you want.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Aelfric said:

but this is the first mention, as far as I know, that they are held responsible for them being broken in the first place. 

I read that part as the Wanderers holding themselves responsible for the damage to the ley lines but that they were destroyed by chaos corruption after the Wanderers fled Ghyran. 

7 hours ago, tea_wild_owl said:

mentioned in the sylvaneth battletome. when nurgle attacked ghyran, the former woodelves abandoned their posts, because they thought nurgle only wants to fight alarielle and the sylvaneth and that chaos would spare them

Hmm? I read the sylvaneth battletome when I was getting into AoS and never found any mention of Wanderers. I just searched it again to double check and there doesn't seem to be any mention of 'wanderers,' 'aelves,' 'wood elves,' or any other such reference. I would love to be wrong, pretty hungry for any scraps of lore I can find. ;)

6 hours ago, WABBIT said:

I want an elven army with a strong affinity toward nature and especially woodlands.

I think the Wanderers still are your aelven army with an affinity for nature, the models still have leaves and stuff on them and nothing of what we do know of their lore has made them less nature-y. The upside to the lack of lore is that your Wanderers can have any backstory you might come up with, and living in the woods in well within their wheelhouse.

Hoping for significant reductions for rangers and wild riders as well!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, awcamawn said:

Hmm? I read the sylvaneth battletome when I was getting into AoS and never found any mention of Wanderers. I just searched it again to double check and there doesn't seem to be any mention of 'wanderers,' 'aelves,' 'wood elves,' or any other such reference. I would love to be wrong, pretty hungry for any scraps of lore I can find. ;)

then I might have read it somewhere else ? I'll check it once I'm back from my vacation ^^

iirc in the sylvaneth tome there was something about the betrayal of the woodelves. wanderer were introduced with AoS, so maybe they were mentioned in grand alliance:order book?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Nick907 said:

I think Wanderers did well in the new Faction Focus. We can keep our battalion "Waystone Pathfinders" and all our Alliance abilities. Plus the points cost reductions. If Glade Guard (for example) are given a reduction in cost and a horde bonus,  ambushing elite units with our Arcane Bodkins will be even more devastating!
I like the explanation of the fluff, the Wanderer's shame, and how open this faction is too whatever theme you want.

 

I don't think shooters will get hordes bonus.. it defeats the purpose. Think about why it was implemented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...