Aeon Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 Hi guys, Thanks has to be made to GW for releasing the Compendiums for the legacy armies for the updated Generals Handbook, it's much appreciated - especially for us Australians who were worried we may have to wait till Sunday. It has been noted however that there may have been typos in the warscrolls (Anvil of Doom can't put its buffs on other units, skink chiefs don't have the Seraphon keyword, etc.) To make it easy for GW when they are looking to put a FAQ out in the future, can people please list things here that may have been missed (like the above examples.) Please do not take this as a license to provide commentary (this is busted, this has been nerfed, points costs, etc) but rather to highlight a few possible typos in warscrolls from an awesome piece of work that GW has provided to us. Any negative comments, OT comments, etc I'm sure will be addressed by the mods. (Mods, please delete this thread if you think it inappropriate for this forum) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeon Posted August 26, 2017 Author Share Posted August 26, 2017 In this post is the list that people have raised. Bear in mind that these may or may not be typos (and may be intended); but simply collecting together information about possible typos/bugs. CHAOS Forsaken lost the "Slaves to Darkness" keyword and the ability to take chaos marks All of Beastmen in the new Compendium updates bear the keyword: BEASTMEN instead of BREYHERD The Gigantic Chaos Spawn's attack is called "Slavering Maws" in the Melee Weapons table but they named it "Crushing Jaws" in the Damage Table. skin Wolves DEATH DESTRUCTION - Under the ability "Nightmare Bloodlust" it says: "...each successful attack roll of 5+...you may immediately make an additional attack...". I am not sure if attack referes to Hit or to Wound (as it could actually be both even if it resembles the gorebull's and doombull's Bloodgreed ability, in which case it would refer to Wound rolls). Mercenary Orruks as unit minimum of 10 models on the warscroll, but shows a unit minimum of 5 on the Pitched Battle Profile (seems an error) ORDER Bretonnia's Noble Champion's Does not have a save. The Bretonnian Lord's lance gets +1 to hit on the charge instead of the +1 to wound and +1 damage common to virtually all lances on the charge. Anvil of Doom can't put its buffs on other units The Points cost for the Apprentice Runesmith in the PDF has him listed as 70. The updated app has him listed as 20 Lizardmen Compendium units don't have the Seraphon keyword Dwarfs lost DISPOSSESSED keyword Empire lost the FREE PEOPLES keyword Wood Elves lost WANDERERS keyword Treekin lost their SYLVANTH keyword. AOS APP In the Free People roster the Bretonnian heroes are updated but the units are from the previous compendium. It recognises the new Free Peoples changes but keeps some in and cant find others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerlin Posted August 26, 2017 Share Posted August 26, 2017 Points cost for the Apprentice Runesmith in the PDF. Has him listed as 70. The updated app has him listed as 20 (his old cost). This makes a lot more sense either way, but ESPECIALLY if anvil of doom cant buff others (which I really hope is a typo) otherwise this unit will be fully retired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Klatz Posted August 26, 2017 Share Posted August 26, 2017 Bretonnia's Noble Champion's +4 Save is missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothnomicon Posted August 26, 2017 Share Posted August 26, 2017 Warriors of Chaos - The Hellcannon lists the crew keyword as DUARDIN, it should be ZHARR GOROTH (Chaos Dwarves vs. regular Dwarves). This was wrong in the prior version too. Orcs & Goblin Compendium (old stuff) - Mercenary Orruks as unit minimum of 10 models on the warscroll, but shows a unit minimum of 5 on the Pitched Battle Profile (seems an error) Legion of Azgorh - Infernal Guard Fireglaves and Ironsworn list unit minimums as 5 on the warscrolls, but 10 on the Pitched Battle Profile (seems odds, may not be an error) Wood Elves - Treekin lost their SYLVANTH keyword. I get that this may have been intentional, but they are clearly animated trees, how could they not be SYLVANTH? Their only keyword at this point is ORDER. If you're going to do this it would just be better to add them to the Substitute Warscroll list as Treekin ------> Dryads/Kurnoth Hunters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davariel Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 Not sure if its intentional or not, but the Bretonnian Lord's lance gets +1 to hit on the charge instead of the +1 to wound and +1 damage common to virtually all lances on the charge. (He still wounds on a 4+ which is usual of lances that get a to wound buff on the charge too) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 6 hours ago, Gothnomicon said: Orcs & Goblin Compendium (old stuff) - Mercenary Orruks as unit minimum of 10 models on the warscroll, but shows a unit minimum of 5 on the Pitched Battle Profile (seems an error) Especially since you're paying 140 points for five of them... not at all a reasonable amount. Too expensive for 10 models! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Klatz Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 Not sure if app mistakes count but in the Free People roster the Bretonnian heroes are updated but the units are from the previous compendium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsraiR Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 Azyr seems to be picking up most unit changes but applying them incorrectly. It recognises the new Free Peoples changes but keeps some in and cant find others. Wish theyd just left them Free Peoples Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone2040 Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 Guys, you need to get over it. The compendium scrolls were puposely altered to not synergize with any of the AoS factions. This means removing keywords that allows them to synergize. They're not errors or typoes. It's extremely obvious that is the case. That being said, there are definitely some typoes (ones which have existed since GHB1). Mercenary Orruks are a prime case, of being 5 for 140. No way (in any edition of the GHB) that this is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothnomicon Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 Darkling Covens - Missing entry for Dreadlord on Black Dragon in the Pitched Battle Profiles. The Sorceress on Black Dragon in included and has points. I consider it an error as the model is still currently sold on their website (from the same boxed set nonetheless). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Misfire Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 19 minutes ago, Gothnomicon said: Darkling Covens - Missing entry for Dreadlord on Black Dragon in the Pitched Battle Profiles. The Sorceress on Black Dragon in included and has points. I consider it an error as the model is still currently sold on their website (from the same boxed set nonetheless). The Dreadlord on Black Dragon's Order Serpentis not Darkling Covens dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SentinelGuy Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 Add in all the old Empire stuff losing Free Peoples keyword. I can't believe GW went to the trouble of writing rules for what are essentially old Empire detachments and then stopped people taking old Empire units like knights in those armies. The same goes for all the Wood Elves units losing Wanderers. I've tried to be positive with AoS up until now, but this is a stupid move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rokapoke Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 14 minutes ago, SentinelGuy said: Add in all the old Empire stuff losing Free Peoples keyword. I can't believe GW went to the trouble of writing rules for what are essentially old Empire detachments and then stopped people taking old Empire units like knights in those armies. The same goes for all the Wood Elves units losing Wanderers. I've tried to be positive with AoS up until now, but this is a stupid move. In two of three ways to play, they're still just as usable as anything else. GW stopped attempting to balance the, against other models that they still sell, which is a perfectly reasonable step two years after ceasing to sell those models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkiham Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 I doubt this was a typo or accidental. Seems to be very speicifcally targettged Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeon Posted August 27, 2017 Author Share Posted August 27, 2017 I totally understand that at least some of these may not be typos (and may be intended); but simply collecting together information about possible typos/bugs to submit to GW in a few days. What they do with it is up to them, but at least they will have a list of stuff that may need to be edited (like stuff that they may have honestly overlooked like the Noble Champion who doesn't even have a save listed; not even -) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tupavko Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 All of Beastmen in the new Compendium updates bear the keyword: BEASTMEN instead of BREYHERD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SentinelGuy Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 47 minutes ago, rokapoke said: In two of three ways to play, they're still just as usable as anything else. GW stopped attempting to balance the, against other models that they still sell, which is a perfectly reasonable step two years after ceasing to sell those models. I get that, but the balancing is a non issue anyway as AoS doesn't handle it well to begin with. Besides that the units they are doing this to weren't over powered to begin with, if anything they were too expensive/weak. Still, it would have been nice to run a great cannon with my free guild alliance making use of the sweet new rules for what are essentially old style Empire detachments. I just don't get it, for every cool thing they do they feel the need to tarnish it with a mistake like that. If their plan was to intentionally suck the fun out of the game then they can chalk this up as a win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 Azyr and the app doesn't seem to have updated the old warscrolls yet, either. Though I've only looked at the Rogue Idol, it's still the old one after deleting and downloading many times. Also, if you try to make a Brayherd army in Azyr, you get the option of adding Bestigors under the leader section... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothnomicon Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 12 hours ago, Double Misfire said: The Dreadlord on Black Dragon's Order Serpentis not Darkling Covens dude. Whoops, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothnomicon Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 While we're on the topic of fixing errors in warscrolls... the english version of Frostheart Phoenix warscroll from the GW site, just has the first of two pages. It is missing the 2nd page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davariel Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 Found a small error in the Bret compendium whilst going over all the differences with the old warscrolls. The shield ability for Men-at-Arms reads as follows: "Add 1 to save rolls for this unit unless it made charge move in the same turn." I know peasants are supposed to have bad grammar, but this feels like a mistake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frozenbeast Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 I noticed something might be an error in the Skin Wolves warscroll. Under the ability "Nightmare Bloodlust" it says: "...each successful attack roll of 5+...you may immediately make an additional attack...". I am not sure if attack referes to Hit or to Wound (as it could actually be both even if it resembles the gorebull's and doombull's Bloodgreed ability, in which case it would refer to Wound rolls). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chord Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 On 8/27/2017 at 7:25 PM, Gothnomicon said: While we're on the topic of fixing errors in warscrolls... the english version of Frostheart Phoenix warscroll from the GW site, just has the first of two pages. It is missing the 2nd page. I reported this to Customer Service over 10 months ago...still broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BunkhouseBuster Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 2 hours ago, chord said: I reported this to Customer Service over 10 months ago...still broken. It's not the only one. I reported to GW that the Ironweld Artillery pieces were also missing their second pages of rules several months back as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.