A few controversal cards from the new expansions

[Hesa_First]

Hey,

after some games with the new cards I would like to talk about some controversal cards from the new expansions. I will talk only of universal cards, the faction specific cards should be discussed in the corresponding warband thread.

 

Ploys

Trap: I would like to start with that one because it is one of the strongest fighting ploys there is. It is basically a free damage after a successful attack, as drive back mitigation is not that prevalent and blocking is kind of rare. Trap is like Righteous Zeal or Gorkamorka's Blessing without range restriction that You can use AFTER seeing if the attack is successful. Shattering Terrain was often used just to sneak a damage in and with Trap Your fighter suffers no damage and, again, You can see if the attack is successful first. A must have imo.

Rebound: What a strong card. I like to compare existing cards and one that comes to mind is On Your Feet. Rebound has a success rate of 33%, On Your Feet 50%. But this is compensated by how awesome Rebound is in every other aspect. Not only does it prevent damage, it reflects it to the attacker. And You don't need an adjacent fighter. And You can use it ony any attack, not just fatal ones. This card is a gamechanger. Thats why i would consider it in most decks, despite the gambling factor.

Ready for Action: A free action is always nice. A dead card in the starting hand though (unless paired with Spoils of Battle.. wich is bad imo, I'm coming to that later). I still like it very much! Being worded differently than Time Trap lets some people believe to allow double movement. That would be ridiculous.

Curious Inversion: Bloodrain on steroids. It can surely helb keeping Reavers, Guard and Skaven alive. Krasus and Harvester might even benefit from it while attacking (or anyone with a Shadeglass Sword or Darts). Not very useful on any other warband than the previously mentioned three.

Death Throes: A better version of Bone Shrapnel or Final Blow. Definetly worth taking in many decks.

Earthquake: Can win You games against objective hold decks, can counter Earthquake, while playing objective hold decks. If Your opponent not happens to play an objective hold deck, it is still very usefull for opening chargelanes and messing with positioning. Right now I am using Earthquake in every deck.

Now for the bummer, Spoils of Battle: While declared an autoinclude by some, once spoiled, Spoils of Battle is just kind of bad. Only really useful on turn one. Sure, a free upgrade is nice, but Spoils of Battle takes a ployslot (and there are so many good ploys) and can clutter Your hand. Not worth taking imo for what little benefit it gives.

 

Upgrades

Acrobatic: Basically +1 Defence for dodge-warbands. It is a strong card, an additional defence die is huge. Nice for the Guard espacially as they keep upgrades. Skaven benefit from it, too, Making Skritch extremely hard to kill: Musk of Fear plus Acrobat make him almost unkillable for one turn.

Awakened Weapon: Having a reroll on a three dice attack with a 33% or 50% hit chance is statistically speaking not far from havin an extra attack die. Just a very strong upgrade that benefits almost any fighter.

Shadeglass Hammer: Not as precise as the Shadeglass Sword and not as likely to crit. Anyhow, three damage flat is awesome and a crit can oneshot almost any fighter. Great for Skaven, Reaver and the Guard imo. Maybe useful for Orruks and Fyreslayers.

And the bummer, Heroslayer: I see a lot of people using it, but it is just so bad. Only one attack die is garbage, attacking someone with shield characteristik and one defence die has a 25% success rate. Wasting an upgrade slot, a glory to equip and an activation to attack (maybe even a charge, rendering the fighter useless for one round) is a lot to invest for a poor gamble. A very bad weapon upgrade, especially with the neat shadeglass weapons around.

 

Objectives

Precise Use of Force: Score immediately objectives are strong. This one is acually not that hard to achieve in most matchups imo.

And the Bummer, Master of War: Hyped as easy to score. While this is true in Round 2-3, Master of War is a dead card on turn one in most cases. And You want easy to score one glory objectives turn one.

 

 

Those are just my thoughts on those few cards that seem to be met with mixed feelings in the community.

 

[Qraith]

In my opinion Heroslayer can be a really strong upgrade depending on the warband. On Reavers it’s awesome since they can boost their attack. Also on the prince of dust it can work wonders for guard

[Biboune]

17 hours ago, Hesa_First said:

Hey,

after some games with the new cards I would like to talk about some controversal cards from the new expansions. I will talk only of universal cards, the faction specific cards should be discussed in the corresponding warband thread.

 

Ploys

Trap: I would like to start with that one because it is one of the strongest fighting ploys there is. It is basically a free damage after a successful attack, as drive back mitigation is not that prevalent and blocking is kind of rare. Trap is like Righteous Zeal or Gorkamorka's Blessing without range restriction that You can use AFTER seeing if the attack is successful. Shattering Terrain was often used just to sneak a damage in and with Trap Your fighter suffers no damage and, again, You can see if the attack is successful first. A must have imo.

 

I do agree with you on your analyze. But I just want to point out that +1 damage cards help to score Precise Use of Force, Crushing Force or No Remorse, Victorious Duel, Skritch is the Best, Yes-Yes etc.

Trap is still a very good card.

[Sleboda]

Not sure how some of these are controversial, tbh.

I will go through more later (about to play some!), but I wanted to point out that Ready for Action absolutely does allow a second Move.  The rule book is very explicit about cards allowing Moves even if a fighter has taken a Move action.

Also, you must not have experience Hungering Skaven with Heroslayer.  Game over, practically, Wrecks your day. Heroslayer FTW.

[Hesa_First]

10 hours ago, Qraith said:

In my opinion Heroslayer can be a really strong upgrade depending on the warband. On Reavers it’s awesome since they can boost their attack. Also on the prince of dust it can work wonders for guard

I don't see any reason why to pick Heroslayer over Shadeglass Axe, Hammer, Sword. All those deal a decent amount of damage (huge amounts on a crit), are reliable due to good stats and therefore can drive the enemy back more often than not. Heroslyer either deals a slightly higher amount of damage or, more liekly, does nothing at all. Shadeglass Darts or the Shadeglass Axe even let You stay on an objective.

Keep in mind that a lot of shadeglass weapons can deal 3 damage, wich can be easily pushed to 4 with ploys and upgrades. So onehitting SCE or Orruks is a lot more likely with a shadeglass weapon than a one die heroslayer. Sure, those weapons are one use only (upon hitting), but the bearer will die after one attack more often than not either way.

For the Prince I would still prefer Demonic Weapon or a Shadeglass Weapon over heroslayer. One die is just not that great. Most fighters have one defence die so the possibility of two or even three successes on an attack is such a huge factor.

 

4 hours ago, Biboune said:

I do agree with you on our analyze. But I just want to point out that +1 damage cards help to score Precise Use of Force, Crushing Force or No Remorse, Victorious Duel, Skritch is the Best, Yes-Yes etc.

Good point.

[Kugane]

I'm having a really hard time fitting some of these amazing ploys into my deck without breaking the 10 cards "limit" (consistency etc)

So many fun cards!

[Hesa_First]

3 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Not sure how some of these are controversial, tbh.

I will go through more later (about to play some!), but I wanted to point out that Ready for Action absolutely does allow a second Move.  The rule book is very explicit about cards allowing Moves even if a fighter has taken a Move action.

Also, you must not have experience Hungering Skaven with Heroslayer.  Game over, practically, Wrecks your day. Heroslayer FTW.

True, some of them are more controversial than others, but I've seen people with mixed feelings towards any of these.

EDIT: And I included Trap just because I wanted to talk about how awesome it is.

In the rulebook it is definitely statet that additional moves via ploys are a thing. But following that logic, there is no reason why Time Trap should not allow  an additional move action. I suppose the corresponding part in the rulebook was written before most cards were and before playtesting revealed the stupidity of double moves. Not having that changed was an oversight I suppose. The wording in the FAQ regarding Time Trap "You cannot use this action to do something you could not normally do" is realy bad, as it doesn't take the rulebook regarding additional actions into account. Yet it still forbids charges after moves as an example (again, poor example). I guess that "You cannot use this action to do something you could not normally do" was supposed to invalidate the corresponding rulebook passage on the whole and not just for Time Trap.

I hope another FAQ will hit soon. Until then, RAW support Your statement without a doubt.

You mean putting Black Hunger on Hungering Skaven, too? I think those are two upgrades that are just not as good as other upgrades right now. Not only go two upgrade slots in vein by supporting the arguably weakest fighter in the game, You spend glory on the arguably weakest fighter of the game that could be used for Skritch, the real Skaven powerhouse. And all that, again, for a poor gamble. Black Hunger sabotages the gamble further by luring the Hungering Skaven into a position where each defender has support. This drops the likelihood of hitting even further.

There might be occasions where this gamble works out just fine and then it will most likely be really decisive. But it is just so much efford and cards for this little chance, that I don't think it can consistently contribute to someones gameplan.

 

1 hour ago, Kugane said:

I'm having a really hard time fitting some of these amazing ploys into my deck without breaking the 10 cards "limit" (consistency etc)

So many fun cards!

I know, so many ploys seem to be autoincludes right now! It is really hard to drop one.

The LVO winner used a 22 card deck, even before the release of the new warbands. Maybe this is the new way to go.

[Sleboda]

3 hours ago, Kugane said:

I'm having a really hard time fitting some of these amazing ploys into my deck without breaking the 10 cards "limit" (consistency etc)

So many fun cards!

We really, really, really need a proper thread about breaking the convention of 20 card decks. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I get it.  20, bro!

I can't help but think there are legit ways to play with larger decks that don't deserve scorn.

[Biboune]

I think 20 cards is more than a convention: most of the time you mulligan because there is too many upgrades in you first hand, drawing another hand full of upgrades would be very unlucky, and as you can only draw 15 cards during end phases... that makes 20 cards. Duel of Wits (and another Khorne card) let you drawn more cards but it takes the place of other ploys leading your deck to have less "true" ploys than upgrades. 

Only turtle  Stormcasts can build their deck with the idea of using one (or more) activation per round to drawn cards.

There is a lot of good cards but I think the point about deck building is not to take all the best cards but to respect some kind of logic regarding the band you play and the objective cards you want to score.

[Kugane]

@Hesa_First @Sleboda I think main thing in any cardgame is consistency of drawing the right cards at the right time, if you go anything over the minimum it impacts consistency sadly. Even if you muligan you starting hand entirely, you will need to play every card in your hand or draw several times to run out of power cards. So I think 20 is the sweet spot in terms of having a game plan and sticking with it rather than having some of everything and leaving everything up to chance. Some cards are just so universally good haha. If we get more cards like  duel of wits however, then we can probably go for bigger builds, but for now I think 20 is the best.

 

[Ploymaster]

11 hours ago, Hesa_First said:

In the rulebook it is definitely statet that additional moves via ploys are a thing. But following that logic, there is no reason why Time Trap should not allow  an additional move action. I suppose the corresponding part in the rulebook was written before most cards were and before playtesting revealed the stupidity of double moves. Not having that changed was an oversight I suppose. The wording in the FAQ regarding Time Trap "You cannot use this action to do something you could not normally do" is realy bad, as it doesn't take the rulebook regarding additional actions into account. Yet it still forbids charges after moves as an example (again, poor example). I guess that "You cannot use this action to do something you could not normally do" was supposed to invalidate the corresponding rulebook passage on the whole and not just for Time Trap.

You (and many people) simply don't understand the rules.

The "golden rule" (page 17) says:

"Some cards allow you to do things that you wouldn't normally be allowed to do by the rules printed in this book. Whenever a card contradicts the rules printed in this book, the card takes precedence."

"Ready for action" explicitly says you can make a move action - it contradicts the rules.

"Time trap" only changes the order of activations. It does not allow you to break any other rules. In other words, "Time trap" explicitly contradicts the normal order of player activations. It does not contradict any other rules.

It becomes more clear, and easier to remember, if you rephrase the "golden rule":

"If you can follow both the rulebook and the card, do so."

[NeverEasy]

16 minutes ago, Ploymaster said:

"Time trap" only changes the order of activations. It does not allow you to break any other rules. In other words, "Time trap" explicitly contradicts the normal order of player activations. It does not contradict any other rules.

While the other stuff you said is true, I disagree with this part. Time Trap does not change the order of activations. 

Time Trap does two things: it gives a fighter an immediate action and it forces you to choose pass during your next activation. Time Trap does not say "immediately take another activation" or something like that, it gives a fighter an action. You could not for example use Time Trap to draw a Power card. 

The only difference in wording between Ready for Action and Time Trap is Ready for Action specifies the action (move or attack)  and Time Trap does not (just an "action").

It is also slightly odd that in FAQ 1.1 the part about Time Trap said "You cannot use this action to do something you could not normally do (e.g. make an Attack action with a fighter that has already made a Charge action in this phase)" but in FAQ 1.2 they changed the example part to "e.g. make a Charge action with a fighter that has already made a Move action in this phase)". Why did they feel the need to change that?

To further complicate stuff, CodFather wrote this on page 6 of the community FAQ thread:
"Just an FYI on Time Trap as even after reading all this and the FAQ I still had it wrong.  I was at the LVO this weekend, and the game designer, David Sanders, was running the event.  Time Trap was ruled to allow you to take any actions, as long as that action is not a move action on a model that has already moved.  For example, I can charge Brightshield in and swing on the Warden, do 2 damage, then play time trap.  Then swing on him again with Brightshield (even tho she had already charged) and finish him off. " 

Personally I can see were both sides are coming from.

[Hesa_First]

5 hours ago, Ploymaster said:

You (and many people) simply don't understand the rules.

The "golden rule" (page 17) says:

"Some cards allow you to do things that you wouldn't normally be allowed to do by the rules printed in this book. Whenever a card contradicts the rules printed in this book, the card takes precedence."

"Ready for action" explicitly says you can make a move action - it contradicts the rules.

"Time trap" only changes the order of activations. It does not allow you to break any other rules. In other words, "Time trap" explicitly contradicts the normal order of player activations. It does not contradict any other rules.

It becomes more clear, and easier to remember, if you rephrase the "golden rule":

"If you can follow both the rulebook and the card, do so."

Your conclusion is wrong from a deductive perspective, as is Your understanding of Time Trap.

First: "Some cards allow you to do things that you wouldn't normally be allowed to do" would not forbid a double move through Time Trap. Time Trap says "They can take an action". This contradicts the rules and therefore the card would take precedence, the fighter can take an action (move, attack, go on guard). It has nothing at all to do with the order of activations.

Ready for Action says "They can make a move or attack action". The wording is the exact same, except it resticts the actions You can take to move or attack. There is nothing else seperating it from Time Trap, regarding the rules on page 17. That "Ready for action explicitly says you can make a move action" has nothing to do with anything on page 17. You for whatever reason just assume this makes a difference with nothing at all to back up Your statement.

It is Your understanding of the card which just could be wrong just like Your understanding of Time Trap. Right now, as I said, RAW would allow to take a double move with Ready for Action, just like RAW pre FAQ allowed a double move through Time Trap.  But from a logical point of view the next FAQ will most likely change that.

 

[Sleboda]

8 minutes ago, Hesa_First said:

... would allow to take a double move with Ready for Action, just like RAW pre FAQ allowed a double move through Time Trap. 

The rules do indeed allow it, rather unambiguously. Were it not for the specic anti-Move call-out in the FAQ, you could move with Time Trap too. The FAQ is actually causing a problem, but not one we can't solve. It's simply a errata more than an FAQ, as it effectively changes the wording on Time Trap.

The danger is in thinking that this card-specific "errata" is a general one. Once you realize the change to Time Trap has literally nothing at all to do with Ready, it gets much easier to accept Ready at its clear face value.

[Requizen]

19 hours ago, Hesa_First said:

I don't see any reason why to pick Heroslayer over Shadeglass Axe, Hammer, Sword. All those deal a decent amount of damage (huge amounts on a crit), are reliable due to good stats and therefore can drive the enemy back more often than not. Heroslyer either deals a slightly higher amount of damage or, more liekly, does nothing at all. Shadeglass Darts or the Shadeglass Axe even let You stay on an objective.

Heroslayer is a constant threat, and guaranteed 4 damage is huge. Compared to Shadeglass Hammer against Orruks or Stormcast, getting 3 damage is more guaranteed, but you lose the weapon afterwards. So if you pop it on a trash Rat or Petitioner, after it swings they can basically ignore that unit, and the Orruk or Stormcast in question is likely still alive. Heroslayer is less reliable, but as long as it's on the field it's a one-shot threat that they can't ignore. If a Rat runs up and pops Basha with it, they still have to worry about it coming up and killing Bonekutta with it, even if the Rat in question dies and gets rezzed. The fact that it's 4 baseline means it can also oneshot anything baseline other than Gurzag or Fjul Inspired, and dictates where they place those important models until they get a +1 wound.

I think Shadeglass Hammer and Heroslayer are fairly interchangeable, and there are plenty of situations where I'd prefer the Hammer. However, there are a number of times where Heroslayer is better as well.

[Hesa_First]

1 hour ago, Sleboda said:

The rules do indeed allow it, rather unambiguously. Were it not for the specic anti-Move call-out in the FAQ, you could move with Time Trap too. The FAQ is actually causing a problem, but not one we can't solve. It's simply a errata more than an FAQ, as it effectively changes the wording on Time Trap.

This is a rather good point, good chances You are right.

The Time Trap FAQ is still written as an answer though. That they didn't write something like "The card should read..." keeps my hopes up, Ready for Action will be ruled just like Time Trap. Even without the double move, the card is insanely strong... double move would make it an autoinclude in every deck imo.

 

[Sleboda]

I would prefer they don't change it. It's one of the few options we have for dealing with Heroslayer Hungry Skaven.

[mmimzie]

3 hours ago, Requizen said:

Heroslayer is a constant threat, and guaranteed 4 damage is huge. Compared to Shadeglass Hammer against Orruks or Stormcast, getting 3 damage is more guaranteed, but you lose the weapon afterwards. So if you pop it on a trash Rat or Petitioner, after it swings they can basically ignore that unit, and the Orruk or Stormcast in question is likely still alive. Heroslayer is less reliable, but as long as it's on the field it's a one-shot threat that they can't ignore. If a Rat runs up and pops Basha with it, they still have to worry about it coming up and killing Bonekutta with it, even if the Rat in question dies and gets rezzed. The fact that it's 4 baseline means it can also oneshot anything baseline other than Gurzag or Fjul Inspired, and dictates where they place those important models until they get a +1 wound.

I think Shadeglass Hammer and Heroslayer are fairly interchangeable, and there are plenty of situations where I'd prefer the Hammer. However, there are a number of times where Heroslayer is better as well.

both weapons have a lot of good combo potential. Shade glass hammer and great strength, or with frenzied stabbling or the other +1 daamge ploy. Makes sahde glass hammer a consistant threat until the thing breaks over the top of some poor unfortunate stormcast.  Heck hungry rat can also use the shade glass hammer with black hunger, sure it breaks once you take one some out, but you can roll 2 or 3 times in a single activation to get a chance to break it. That's alittle more... reliable?? than throwing 1 die 2 or 3 times with hero slayer.
 

Also while orcs and storm cast ahve several 4 wound models. Skaven/skeletons/dwarfs only have 1 model that starts at 4 wounds. So one good crack of a shade glass hammer with boost damage is all you need, and against such forces jsut the stand alone hammer can also get you there. 
 

hero slayer on a looser model with total offence and ready for battle, time trap, remorseless assault is also pretty strong giving you a powerful 3 dice attack that can break the strongest of backs.  Hero slayer again on the black hunger rat is also very powerful for letting you get multiple rolls out of single actions. spawning a rat or skeleton out of no where next to an enemy model with hero slayer (or glass hammer for the matter) off a ploy, and then using your activation for a suprize swing is also very nuts, and the only counter play is to just stay far away from starting hexs... which turns the board into a mine field. 

I don't think we should ignore the daemonic weapon either. While it kills the little guys that need the thing on the 2nd attack. If you do one of your attacks with it. Wait for the thing to die, and then bring it back to do another attack it can be strong. even more so again with either black hunger or great strength, or boosted by frenzied stabbing. 

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, mmimzie said:

daemonic weapon either. While it kills the little guys that need the thing on the 2nd attack

Actually, isn't there a rules update somewhere saying you can't take an action that kills yourself?

[Biboune]

Indeed Heroslayer is controversial card.

I think it is a bad one: you need luck or few other cards to make it touch something. Plus, it will be useful only against some bands, Stormcast and Orruks. There is other ways to deal 4 damages. Mighty Swing and Mighty Strength on Saek or Skritch grant 4 damages, M5, possible cleave and both of the card are very good by themself.

My opinion is that I would be happy to see a opponent coming in a tournament with the hungry Skaven combo. Make me think to put Rebound in my deck, just to see the first against-all-odd heroslayer attack having another 33% to fail. 

But this is not the thread to express my doubt about agressive skaven decks: I can't make my mind about another card.

Second-in-command : It does nothing but messing with the opponent leader killing objectives. Assassinate like cards and Victorious Duel are rewarding taking out leaders, some of them are already a target because of theirs special action, some of them are quite fragile. For example, with the reavers, Garreck need to be on the front line and can died quite easely. Your opponent can take him out and earn 1, 2 or 3 glory points more than for an other model just because he is a leader... I don't know how the meta will evolve but I think their is chances assassinate objectives find their way in Skaven and SGuard decks in particular (leader with range attack, possibility to have cleave, +/- mobility and other models to bait the enemy leaders). Just in case I'll put Second in Command in my deck for the next tournament I go to.

[Anamnesis]

9 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Actually, isn't there a rules update somewhere saying you can't take an action that kills yourself?

The damage of demonic weapon occure before the attack, so no second attack.

[Sleboda]

6 hours ago, Anamnesis said:

The damage of demonic weapon occure before the attack, so no second attack.

Right. That's what I'm saying. If my memory of the disallowing of suicide is correct, you could not even make the first swing since you know you must Attack more than one fighter and you have only two wounds.

[Ploymaster]

On 26.02.2018 at 1:37 PM, NeverEasy said:

 

On 26.02.2018 at 12:51 PM, Ploymaster said:

"Time trap" only changes the order of activations. It does not allow you to break any other rules. In other words, "Time trap" explicitly contradicts the normal order of player activations. It does not contradict any other rules.

While the other stuff you said is true, I disagree with this part. Time Trap does not change the order of activations.

I simplified the result of "Time trap" on purpose. Do you really think I can't read the card? I tried to explain how the "golden rule" works, but for some people it's too complicated it seems. The important thing here is what the card really contradicts. And in the end "Time trap", simply speaking, changes the order of fighter's activation. It allows a fighter to make an action outside of normal timing rules - that is the real result of the card. It does NOT allow a fighter to make a forbidden action - you need explicit contradiction for that. (Compare cards like "Leadin' by example" and "Ready for action".)

Page 18, Activations:

"To activate a fighter simply choose one of your fighters to make an action."

It is the same wording like "Time trap" - "make an action". Is that mean you can make a double move? No, you must obey all rules. In other words you can normally take a legal action.

On 26.02.2018 at 1:37 PM, NeverEasy said:

It is also slightly odd that in FAQ 1.1 the part about Time Trap said "You cannot use this action to do something you could not normally do (e.g. make an Attack action with a fighter that has already made a Charge action in this phase)" but in FAQ 1.2 they changed the example part to "e.g. make a Charge action with a fighter that has already made a Move action in this phase)". Why did they feel the need to change that?

I wrote them an email the day they released FAQ 1.1, but regrettably for some reason they waited until the next edition time to correct the mistake. It was simply the mistake of the person who wrote the document. The charge rules forbid you to activate a fighter again however, "Time trap" is not an activation, so an attack action is legal. On the other hand, another charge action is not legal, because of move rules.

@Sleboda it is NOT an errata - the answer in FAQ simply explains the "golden rule".

[Biboune]

On 25/02/2018 at 4:15 AM, Hesa_First said:

Upgrades

Acrobatic: Basically +1 Defence for dodge-warbands. It is a strong card, an additional defence die is huge. Nice for the Guard espacially as they keep upgrades. Skaven benefit from it, too, Making Skritch extremely hard to kill: Musk of Fear plus Acrobat make him almost unkillable for one turn.

 

What is better between Soul Trap and Acrobatic for the reavers in you opinion?

[mmimzie]

1 hour ago, Biboune said:

What is better between Soul Trap and Acrobatic for the reavers in you opinion?

toss up on this one. Technically it's a 4+ save vs an extra 5+ save. However, acrobatics give you another defence die to possible prevent a tie, and thus prevent your guy from getting pushed. It also give you another chance at a crit mildly complicates teh math. I fyou are running skaven i'd say for sure acrobatics. If you are running reavers it's a toss up.  I say this as skaven have a great guard card and on skritch acrobatics is so dumb when you are on guard <.< 3 dice rolling shields/avoids/crits is nice stuff.