Jump to content
Welcome Guest!

Join us now to get access to all our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, and so, so much more. It's also quick and totally free, so what are you waiting for?

tokek

Members
  • Content count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

41 Lord Celestant

About tokek

  • Rank
    Judicator
  1. FAQ landed

    It means that assassin type characters and units (Assassin, Tenebrael Shard, Chameleon Skinks, Grot Fanatics) can still pull this stunt off. Which is probably as intended. I do wonder if they have opened loopholes for units they did not intend to work this way - it would be a shame if they just missed the wording on a rule somewhere for it to be abused.
  2. FAQ landed

    True. It is still really good and it still will hardly ever happen. Also a rule for Dracothion's Tail that looks pretty clear and easy to play. Must get that last batch of Knights.
  3. FAQ landed

    They can't conga right through other units any more so you can screen against them. I really think that fixes the "WTF?!" feeling they had. Still good just perhaps no longer tournament-winning good as skilled players will be able to defend against it much better now.
  4. Heat 1 results.

    *Shrug* Slight variation on the list that won the masters. Not much surprise, until those rules interaction get an errata/fix its going to win a lot of tournaments.
  5. Heat 1 results.

    https://www.twitch.tv/warhammer/videos/all You need to subscribe to view when they are not live.
  6. Is there some way to summon chameleon skinks?

    Also an Engine of The Gods may summon any Seraphon unit on a result of 14-17 of its crazy Cosmic Engine. This is not the same as the spell on the warscroll, it is just summon any Seraphon unit. So you can summon things which have no spell (like a Slann) or any legal number of models in a unit for which you have the summoning pool points available. Of course you do need to roll that 14-17 result so it is far more chancy than normal summoning and probably not a thing to rely on unless you are building a list around it (Slann, multiple EoTG, Starseer for the re-rolls etc). It also has a fixed 8" range that you cannot modify with the usual tricks such as an Astrolith Bearer.
  7. On a rules stupidity scale of 1(a normal dude) to 10(Vanguard Wing) I'd say the Balewind and all its rules are about an 8.5 While even sillier things exist in the game I'm not going to worry about it, the rules are actually very clear and by now everyone should know what it is and what it does. Play on.
  8. The balewind vortex fits the high fantasy vibe of AoS really well. It is possible to build an army that struggles to deal with it but with GHB17 and allies it really is always a choice to build an army that way - in which case I'm not sure that I need to care that someone is unhappy with the outcome of their choice. The existence of mortal wounds gives some lists almost auto-lose matchups. The existence of hordes gives other lists almost auto-lose matchups. I do not see why certain one-dimensional lists need to be artificially protected from their own inherent weakness by banning the thing that counters them. If you choose to take a themed fluffy one-dimensional list to a tournament then the risk of hitting a horrible matchup is part of that choice, live with it don't ban it.
  9. GH2017: the honeymoon is over

    The fundamental issue with Death is the lack of models for a while now - which a GHB17 was never going to fix because its a book It is impossible to tell from the outside why there have been so few Death model. It could be marketing led - a lack of perceived interest backed up by a lack of sales. It could be creativity led - the modelers try to come up with Death model ranges but nobody in the studio is feeling the wow factor. It could be something else entirely. However GHB17 did as much for Death as could be reasonably expected. You can still win games and you have some new options and rules to help keep your games interesting and fresh - that is about all that anybody should have expected from it.
  10. Abilities used outside battlefield

    As I said the distinction is perfectly clear from the question and answer format of the FAQ and the context of what they said - you cannot affect other units when off table. That is all it says. Trying to construe it as some much bigger thing than being the direct answer to a direct question is taking it out of context. I have no interest in what anyone says on Twitter - I avoid Twitter. What you have "dealt with" on Twitter or some other social media or down the pub with your mates is not part of this discussion until you post it in this discussion. Or just ask GW. Has anybody posted it up on their Facebook page as a question to be referred for the next FAQ?
  11. Abilities used outside battlefield

    I think your mistake is to try to take it out of context by reading the answer alone. A FAQ is typically meant to be read as both a question and an answer and that would be the normally correct way to read and understand this format of writing. If you take it out of context you can view this as a general restriction on abilities working while the model/unit is not on the table. As you have identified this would make one of the centerpiece models of the poster-boy faction literally unplayable. As I recall from many years ago we can logically exclude a hypothesis by reductio ad absurdam - which I think we have done here as there is no way GW intend to make one of their prize models unplayable. That interpretation creates an absurd outcome and hence must not be the correct interpretation. From the context there is no other subdivision or logic splitting we are entitled to apply to this statement other than "does this affect other units". So if the ability would affect a unit other than the one that is off the table then it does not apply as per the FAQ. If it applies only to the off-table unit, typically by putting some or all of that warscroll on the table, then there is no reason for it not to apply. Any consideration of active, passive etc has no support from the context so really we have no reason to think that they are relevant.
  12. Almost anything can be made into some sort of competitive event if you really insist; shin-kicking, bog snorkeling and chasing a cheese down a hill are all competitive events within reach of where I live. Arguably these are all more legitimate and worthy competitive endeavors than AOS or 40K, although less physically pleasant and more dangerous. I sometimes quite like the intellectual challenge of competitive GW games in my own way (try to beat the latest Netlist with something they will never have seen before) but after a brief (and occasionally successful) Tournament career I have concluded I like competitive games a lot more than I like some of the competitive gamers. I really do have sympathy for players stuck in a local scene that is not to their liking and where some people feel entitled to belittle and denigrate anyone who does not choose to play that way.
  13. I have a lot of sympathy for anyone in his position but i think there is a fundamental error in believing that more better rules will stop jerks acting like jerks. It is at least as true that those jerks feel absolved of all social responsibility once you give them a supposed balancing systems (points) which they will then abuse to the max. As to the suggested GHB change I do think that really big units have been under-performing and that outside of Kunnin' Rukk are not competitive. So some sort of fix to make big units a bit more competitive on the table seems like a reasonable step, they had many ways they could have done this and I am not going to complain about the one they chose sight unseen.
  14. kharadron Thunderers and you

    If I was going to run a squad of these guys with my Seraphon I would be really tempted to go with the Fumigator or Decksweeper precisely because of the random shots. It is a single dice roll for the unit - which is incredibly economical use of both the re-rolls a Starseer generates and of the +1 from his Curse of Fates spell. I don't have the wording to hand, does the once per game re-roll for Barak-thryng work with this? Otherwise it is too swingy - could be devastating, could be meh.
  15. You might want to explain that to a Bastilodon
×