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?


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

38 Lord Celestant

About tokek

  • Rank
  1. 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.
  2. 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?
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. You might want to explain that to a Bastilodon
  8. Let's chat Kharadron Overlords

    All I have heard is that there was some move towards making this part of the WYSIWYG element of soft scores - if a tome specifies a colour scheme for the rules you are taking then you should use those colours if you want to get maximum soft score points. I see no harm in that. Having seen what happens in 40K I would actually quite like to see this on a rules pack for an AOS event.
  9. Let's chat Kharadron Overlords

    Each of them is a separate rule, can't immediately see why not. Basic 4+ save (3+ if you can manage to park your enormous boat in terrain) Doughty Champion Superlative Sailors You are never going to get all 3 (mortal wounds bypass the 4+) but all the same you get multi-layered saves against anything. Which is very tanky.
  10. Let's chat Kharadron Overlords

    Agreed. I think if you take a Frigate full of Cannon Thunderers you are really looking to make your opponent castle up against the threat and then need to build the rest of your list to take advantage of the fact that many opponents will do exactly that. If your opponent does as you want you can then just keep the frigate off the table as a constant threat in case they try to break out - it should be worth keeping a few hundred points of models off the table for a while if that gives you a big positional advantage in return.
  11. Let's chat Kharadron Overlords

    I think you would be better off making your Ironclad your general and taking Doughty Champion. If Barak Ziflin that gives you a 4+ save, an additional 5+ against wounds/mortal wounds and then finally a 6+ against mortal wounds. Pretty tanky. Feels quite appropriate for Barak Ziflin - the flagship being the centre of their force. [edit] As ably pointed out by yarrickson the Ironclad does not get Doughty Champion because KO allegiance works differently to Order in this regard.
  12. It will struggle with any list that you really need mortal wounds to hurt. KO have very little access to mortal wounds, if rend does not get the job done I am not sure what else they can do.
  13. Also Facebook https://www.facebook.com/SouthCoastGT/?fref=ts
  14. It was on the stream, at that distance it looked OK. Not the most stunning army there but up to an acceptable standard. I would guess Alex is 100% happy coming first on the tables and being nowhere near any of the many awards for painting. Similarly I would hope the great painters were in the running for those prizes and were probably not that bothered about winning the games on the table. I'm sure Warhammer TV wish every army they showed was a stunner and would inspire people into the hobby but not everyone has those stunning skills.
  15. Let's chat Kharadron Overlords

    Personally I think it is decently tough and moves fast enough, it just does not seem to hit very hard. Its fine in narrative games and the way it works in a fleet of ships is really nice but in matched play it just feels like a lot of points for what it does. As an illustration I can have 2 units of Skywardens for fewer points; they can have twice as many Drill Cannons, Volley Guns rather than Carbines and have more wounds with a better save. I may just have missed what makes them good in matched play but so far my view of them is that they lose out to other KO options that can fill the same role better.