Jump to content

Beastclaw Raiders Load-out Question


Konic

Recommended Posts

Solaris I understand what you're saying and agree.

As you mentioned the mournfang pack is a special case, as I'm fielding units of two instead of a pack of say six or ten models. A unit with lots of models with banners and horns on everyone would be silly, however I'm still convinced you can do that if you wish, but like you say people won't be too pleased to play you. With larger groups your banner and horn blower would of course be protected as I can allocate wounds to different models so I don't think it would be an issue. When it comes to fielding two models in each unit, things change and it's not about modeling for advantage in a bad or abusive way but rather being able to take the war gear that's available while being within the rules. 

When it comes to modelling my units in a fashion which I find appealing, this for me would be a priority, which obviously doesn't match with the FAQ answer from GW nor will it probably be okay in most competitive scenes which I accept. 

At the end of the day the discussion started with a general question and has opened other doors and questions for me personally. I would simply take units of two models, a Skalg with a gargant hacker, pistol and banner, a second ogre with gargant hacker and a horn. This will obviously give me all the options I want with the exception of the Skalg being able to benefit from the horn buff when charging if the second ogre is killed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Konic said:

At the end of the day the discussion started with a general question and has opened other doors and questions for me personally. I would simply take units of two models, a Skalg with a gargant hacker, pistol and banner, a second ogre with gargant hacker and a horn. This will obviously give me all the options I want with the exception of the Skalg being able to benefit from the horn buff when charging if the second ogre is killed. 

Yes, I think this is a very reasonable approach, and it's what I too plan to do when I finally get to building my own Mournfang. I completely get that you aren't coming from a bad place, but that you simply wish to build your models in a way that looks cool to you while retaining all of the rules. I hope I didn't come off as argumentative in my post, I simply wanted to highlight that despite your good intentions, people are likely to be annoyed by something like this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Solaris said:

Yes, I think this is a very reasonable approach, and it's what I too plan to do when I finally get to building my own Mournfang. I completely get that you aren't coming from a bad place, but that you simply wish to build your models in a way that looks cool to you while retaining all of the rules. I hope I didn't come off as argumentative in my post, I simply wanted to highlight that despite your good intentions, people are likely to be annoyed by something like this. 

Solaris, you didn't come across as argumentative at all :D

Although what i posted earlier regarding the Skalg having a Gargant Hacker, Ironlock Pistol and a banner while the second model in the unit has a Gargant Hacker and be a Horn Blower sounds reasonable, is it an actual certain option to take this particular load-out in the unit? This leads back to my original question on the first post i made.

 I ask as this as if i did want to play in a competitive setting i would like to be able to. I'm also the type of person who wants to decide on a load-out and then glue things down. I would hate to have to go back and break parts off or even regret the choices I've made if this particular load-out choice is not considered "legal" or "fair"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Konic said:

I have read the FAQ regarding the question about horn blowers and standard bearers, it simply says that any model who is holding a horn or a banner can be assumed to have the same weapons as the rest of the group. While i accept this, i think the reverse should also be true? If my ogre holds a two handed Gargant Hacker, he can also have a banner and a horn without the actual banner and horn being modeled. I ask this as if the banner holder is not holding the actual weapon given and this is accepted, why should it not be acceptable the other way around?

Your thoughts?

  

Well, my thought about this is that, with banners and instruments at least, for the most part the scrolls do not limit the number of either you can have in a unit; So if there wasn't a requirement that they be modeled with the equipment they have and folks could just use regular troops to represent them then what would stop me from saying that every normal-appearing model in my 40 man plague monk unit has all the options (they've got like 4 options for banners and instruments); so can I maintain all options and bonus rules on my unit till I'm down to a last man, and I don't have to have any consideration for which models I remove during casualties (should I take off my contagion banner bearer or my doom pipes player to avoid breaking consistency, or should I just take a normal model that does break unit consistency, or, etc. etc.).  Further, there are a few abilities (not a ton) that attack individuals models, so it seems like if someone has one of those and takes out the skeleton banner bearer that allows the unit to regenerate it would be annoying to hear "actually, all 30 of my skeletons have banners, they're just not modeled on all of them" or what have you.  Basically, since modeling is the only limit on banners and instruments with regards to most warscrolls, it seems like it ought to be enforced to avoid kind of ridiculous situations like those examples.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, Chris Tomlin said:

The matter of whether a unit leader can also carry a banner or be a musician will be added to a future FAQ :)

 

If I could bend someones ear about this, I might suggest they take up the question of the "dual welding" horns and banners (and maybe and whether it comes down to if the special options give a model a new name name i.e. hornblower vs. describes a piece of equipment i.e. carries a raiding banner (I'd say both descriptive  options are used inconsistently across the scrolls) )  :D:D:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without trying to sound like an old broken record, i need clarification on this issue still. The reason why i'm very adamant on this is because i have a bunch of Mournfangs i'm ready to assemble and i need to be sure that I'm doing this correctly.

Heywoah_twicth was kind enough to point out and explain that a unit of two Mournfang's - one being the Skalg, which can be given a Gargant Hacker, Ironlock Pistol AND a banner, while the other ogor can take a Gargant Hacker and a Horn. 

I'm stressing if this is correct because Heywoah_twitch mentions in previous posts, to other players aswell, that the banner is considered an item which any model can take in the unit, but when you read the warscroll the EXACT same wording is used for the Horn. To me the Horn is also just an item any model could carry along with any other equipment as well, does anyone else agree with this also, or is it just me? 

Maybe the Skalg actually can't take any extra equipment, which is the total opposite of what i've been saying in this post all along i know. I dont want to have to break things off my models later on down the line if this is the case. I'm just wondering if there is any written rules or anything else to support this particular load-out with the Skalg taking the banner apart from general player base acceptance? 

Like i said before, i'm not trying to be difficult but i want to glue everything down on my models but i need to make sure this is correct. Although more experienced players like Heywoah_twitch, whos experience i'm sure we all value, say this is right, i'm not sure this is viable? 

What are your thoughts?

P.S:  I'm not picking Heywoah_twitch out to make him sound wrong or to pick on him, i'm just trying to confirm the rules for myself as he is a more experienced player, that i'm looking at for guidance. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not the exact same wording, that's why I think they work differently, and why, when I asked this question when I started playing in the rules forum, they told me what I told you. It both made sense and seemed to be the consensus. 

Besides FAQs and tournament organizer rules, all we have is general player base consensus. 

I do feel a little picked on, just from the sheer repetition, but I'm posting on mobile while out of town, so perhaps I'm sounding dismissive  when actually I'm just short on battery power and time in between meetings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read your other posts heywoah_twicth and it seems like you have useful information from experience and I'm sure everyone appreciated your input and advice, me included. The only reason why I quote you is because you've contributed to this post and I've seen other posts where you give out the same advice. As like you, I'm asking and reading things to gain a better understanding of the game. Like I said, it's not to point fingers and pick on you at all. I'm sorry if it came across that way, not my intention at all.

Back to the issue. Although player base approval of rules is totally acceptable and fine, there must be an intended rule for something like this from GW, it may just not be very clear at the moment. I'm only challenging this way of thinking because I suppose the information that's being told to new players will be passed down until it's cleared up and if it's based on what players think is logical or what makes sense that's obviously a totally valid way of doing things, I was hoping for more of a solid yes or no answer which we don't seem to have at the moment I believe. 

As for the wording for the horn and banner, I see what you're saying in regards to it. The word "be" is used for horn blowers or "carry" for the banners so it's possible that what you said is right and I can understand why it's considered right. 

I've spoken to members of staff at GW, although not the game designers and GW store managers. I've got different answers back from everyone! It seems there is different views, as expected. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Quote

As for the wording for the horn and banner, I see what you're saying in regards to it. The word "be" is used for horn blowers or "carry" for the banners so it's possible that what you said is right and I can understand why it's considered right. 

 

This is what makes me agree with @heywoah_twitch on this one - it seems reasonably clear that the wording intends both 'Skalg' and 'Horn Blower' as individual roles, while the banner is a piece of gear that can be carried by anyone in the unit. This essentially makes it a question of whether a single model can have multiple individual roles, to which I would err on the side of 'probably not'. I severely doubt that would have been intended by the design team. 

Nevertheless, I'm happy to be proved wrong with the FAQ!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mannotron said:

 

This is what makes me agree with @heywoah_twitch on this one - it seems reasonably clear that the wording intends both 'Skalg' and 'Horn Blower' as individual roles, while the banner is a piece of gear that can be carried by anyone in the unit. This essentially makes it a question of whether a single model can have multiple individual roles, to which I would err on the side of 'probably not'. I severely doubt that would have been intended by the design team. 

Nevertheless, I'm happy to be proved wrong with the FAQ!

From a narrative standpoint I would disagree. Why shouldn't the leader(aka Skalg) also be a Horn Blower. I mean it is unlikely that musicians are leaders, but on the other side it was also unusal that the musicians can carry a banner and an instrument. I can't agree with the reasoning that one model can only play one role.

In the end the only thing that differs is the wording. Logically and narratively speaking i see no reason why the leader can't be a mighty Horn Blower. I think this is the thinking which transfers from Warhammer Fantasy to AoS or tabletop in general.  It was always an unspoken rule. And i think to make it official it should be cleared and written down.

It gets also a bit philosophical. Where does it say that something could only be this or that? Most of the time something is more than one thing. In my opinion the word "be" doesn't say it can only be this, or otherwise it has to be that.

If it is worded they "A model can only be a Skalg, or a Banner Bearer, or a Horn Blower" I would agree that there is only one option. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think for now it's clear from the scroll that the skalg or hornblower can take a banner but are separate models.

This is a bit different from other warscrolls with command models but then most warscrolls differ subtly in their wording.

The FAQ will clear it up properly because unless this it's a special setup for super elite units (where 2 is the minimum) the simple answer is that the three roles - champion, banner bearer and musician - are from the classic warhammer command group. Those never shared roles that I'm aware of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
29 minutes ago, Konic said:

Fantastic, I can't seem to find the FAQ confirming this however. Would you mind pointing me in the right direction?

The problem here is not just FAQ’s on this specific matter, but the army rules being outdated for AoS 2.0. Any battletome before Nighthaunt could be considered outdated for AoS, and sadly Nighthaunt also suffers from not having the banner/musician update to new battletomes and warscrolls. You see, before GW just stated that models can be horn blowers and that models can be banners on the warscrolls, while they always included limits for certain weapons. Recently GW changed this idea, ever since the Beasts of Chaos Battletome and we now see it for every updated warscroll since that battletome. I know the answer is a rather annoying one for you, since I own armies before Beasts of Chaos as well of course, but if you truelly want your answer, you shall have to wait till GW updates Beastclaw Raiders.... or actually writes a FAQ on this specific matter. I included a few pictures of a bestigor warscroll and plague monks warscroll to show you the specific limitations that GW is now implementing in armies for banners and musicians.

9A184F02-02E5-48AB-AAB7-021D9B89E8D0.jpeg

C86289AB-A242-4032-A3DC-7E5B9EEDD07C.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now to follow up on this. This at least eliminates one question. You can assume that not every model in a unit can be a standard bearer or musician anymore, once they receive updated rules. They clearly are limiting the amount per unit. And before you ask, can one model have multiple roles? Like in the plague monk warscroll, can 1 single model be a standard bearer AND a plague harbinger? So far i haven’t seen anything against it. Tell me if i’m wrong about this though, i might’ve missed a FAQ in that case. What i would personally do, is adhere to the recent updated warscrolls and assume that Beastclaw Raiders will also get limitations, this will most likely be 1 banner per 2 models and 1 musician per 2 models for the Mournfang. As for multiple roles per model. I honestly think there will be a FAQ at some point limiting this too, so the save aproach to building your models, is probably spreading your options:

skalg with pistol and a banner/horn and the second mournfang with the other option.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right okay.... So the example warscrolls you've supplied, That Guy, is interesting as GW have really gone to town to clear up any confusion on those units, which is good! I can see how "outdated" and open to interpretation the Mournfang warscroll is compared to the examples above.

I like the detailed warscrolls, they clearly outline the limitations and boundaries for each unit with no doubts. Hopefully we'll see these changes to all the armies across AoS sooner or later, but as you've mentioned, modelling with banner and horn blower as separate models would be the safe way to go, although im still interested in reading the FAQ which Heywoah mentioned.

The annoying part of all these changes would be exactly that, changes. Everything is becoming a consumer item, to be chewed up for awhile then spat out and something new and different introduced. We clearly need a good set of rules, updated for each army, that's stable and most importantly, not being changed every 2-3 years just because GW wants to make more money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Konic said:

We clearly need a good set of rules, updated for each army, that's stable and most importantly, not being changed every 2-3 years just because GW wants to make more money.

That is true, we need a clear uniform ruleset over all units and you know what. You are right to be upset, they made Age of Sigmar a much more dimmed down version of a game, just to have these uniform rules, keywords and all that stuff. Now it would be great if they make a choice to change limitations in certain way for newer armies, that they immidiately do it for all the other armies as well. We know there's hundreds of Warscrolls, but let's be fair. 1 day, 1 day is all that's needed to update the entire thing. Yet they decide to ONLY update warscrolls when the specific army gets an update. It turns back to fantasy times when you had to wait for a new army book in order to get some solid ruleset. I thought AoS was meant to uniformely bind it all together. But uh... let's not start bashing GW now I guess. Some decisions are just... I don't know, not understandable from a gamers perspective and that's where we are wrong. We see GW as this grand game design company. But we have to realize, they see themselves as a Company first, in fact I remember a year ago that they stated they are a Model company first, game designer second. That's sadly the harsh reality of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...