AoS 2 - Disciples of Tzeentch Discussion

[Reezark_SP]

37 minutes ago, Kharneth said:

I never take them above 10 and always give them the Scroll and Vulcharc as they do not replace weapons. I don't believe you can use shields with the glaives, so you'll lose 3 shields. Maybe you can use the shields against ranged attacks? I assumed the "double-handed" description meant that it replaces the sword and shield. 

Hmm it would be really lame and annoying if they cannot use their shield while armed with a glaive since building the models as instructed they are clearly holding the glaive in one hand and their shield in the other. 

[Kharneth]

37 minutes ago, Reezark_SP said:

Hmm it would be really lame and annoying if they cannot use their shield while armed with a glaive since building the models as instructed they are clearly holding the glaive in one hand and their shield in the other. 

Odd. They're clearly referred to as double-handed. I don't really think it matters,  I can't imagine someone giving you a hard time over that. Even in the pictures they're holding the glaives with shields, I wonder why they added that phrasing. 

[Waiyuren]

8 minutes ago, Kharneth said:

Odd. They're clearly referred to as double-handed. I don't really think it matters,  I can't imagine someone giving you a hard time over that. Even in the pictures they're holding the glaives with shields, I wonder why they added that phrasing. 

...I need to go put some shields on some guys. 😅

[Reezark_SP]

11 minutes ago, Kharneth said:

Odd. They're clearly referred to as double-handed. I don't really think it matters,  I can't imagine someone giving you a hard time over that. Even in the pictures they're holding the glaives with shields, I wonder why they added that phrasing. 

It probably doesn't matter that much anyway since the rules were updated so that only one model in the unit needs a shield and the whole unit get the extra save. 

[Kharneth]

1 minute ago, Reezark_SP said:

It probably doesn't matter that much anyway since the rules were updated so that only one model in the unit needs a shield and the whole unit get the extra save. 

Sure, but if you take a 6+ save with the arcanite shield and you fail you're surely required to remove the guy with the shield. So you need to have enough shields to survive failing the shield save. 

[Neffelo]

Thanks for the advice everyone, I wanted to be sure before I started assembling them!

[mmimzie]

1 hour ago, Kharneth said:

Sure, but if you take a 6+ save with the arcanite shield and you fail you're surely required to remove the guy with the shield. So you need to have enough shields to survive failing the shield save. 

You are not required to remove the guy with the shield. You can kill any model you like.

[Kharneth]

10 minutes ago, mmimzie said:

You are not required to remove the guy with the shield. You can kill any model you like.

So then really the only reason not to take the glaives is if you don't want to differentiate between the -1 rend attacks and the non-rend attacks. 

[mmimzie]

9 minutes ago, Kharneth said:

So then really the only reason not to take the glaives is if you don't want to differentiate between the -1 rend attacks and the non-rend attacks. 

Yeah basicly, that and it forces you to kill sword and shield models first. 

 

Also when you consider it for the most part you dont need to be too crazy about modeling your models to get the equipment you want. 

 

The box comes with 3 glavine models per unit and a paired weapon guy. You can also say that the guys with the bird and the scroll have paired weapons. Meaning only 4 have shields. 

 

Lastly they dont so enough melee damage to really matter. 

[newsun]

Where was this updated for the acolytes? I see it in the app for Tzaangors, but not for acolytes.

[Kharneth]

Nothing updated, just RAW on the warscroll.

[Waiyuren]

4 hours ago, mmimzie said:

You are not required to remove the guy with the shield. You can kill any model you like.

Are you sure? The warscroll for acolytes is different to the one for tzaangors. It specifically mentions allocating wounds to the model not the unit, whereas the tzaangor warscroll specifies the unit rather than the model.

That says to me that once you allocate to a model with a shield, and fail the save, the model you chose recieves the wound and is removed.

Of course it could be just another example of inconsistent phrasing... 😑

Edited December 4, 2018 by Waiyuren

[mmimzie]

6 hours ago, Waiyuren said:

Are you sure? The warscroll for acolytes is different to the one for tzaangors. It specifically mentions allocating wounds to the model not the unit, whereas the tzaangor warscroll specifies the unit rather than the model.

That says to me that once you allocate to a model with a shield, and fail the save, the model you chose recieves the wound and is removed.

Of course it could be just another example of inconsistent phrasing... 😑

Yeah you are right. Guess my mind made the tzaangor warscroll the same. 

 

I suppose if that is the case I'd make them all shield models, as the melee damage they do is next to useless.

[newsun]

7 hours ago, mmimzie said:

Yeah you are right. Guess my mind made the tzaangor warscroll the same. 

 

I suppose if that is the case I'd make them all shield models, as the melee damage they do is next to useless.

This is how mine are.

The rule did change for Tzaangors with the beast book, it's just acolytes are not in that book. So we may see the acolytes update still at some point.

[Kharneth]

You're both missing an important detail, in my opinion 😝. Are the glaives wieldable with a shield as the models and pictures indicate, or does the phrase "double-handed" mean to say that the glaive cannot be used with a shield? 

I agree it makes next to no difference. 

Edited December 4, 2018 by Kharneth

[flamingwalnut]

6 minutes ago, Kharneth said:

You're both missing an important detail, in my opinion 😝. Are the glaives wieldable with a shield as the models and pictures indicate, or does the phrase "double-handed" mean to say that the glaive cannot be used with a shield? 

I agree it makes next to no difference. 

Double handed means nothing. You need to look for things like "equipped with X OR Y..." The Dispossesed duardin warriors have the same deal, 2 handed weapons AND shields.

[Kharneth]

29 minutes ago, flamingwalnut said:

Double handed means nothing. You need to look for things like "equipped with X OR Y..." The Dispossesed duardin warriors have the same deal, 2 handed weapons AND shields.

"equipped with" and "armed with" are essentially the same thing. What GW expects to be used as rules and to be used as useless extra words is hardly clear.

"A unit of Kairic Acolytes has 10 or more models. Each unit fights with a variety of weapons; some of the Acolytes are armed with a single Cursed Blade while others carry Paired Cursed Blades. Some instead carry a Cursed Blade and an Arcanite Shield. Three in every ten models in the unit can be armed with double-handed Cursed Glaives."

When wielding the glaives, where does it say that we can also have a shield and/or not replace the shield? The way it's written, it implies that any single acolyte can be armed with a single blade, paired blades, a blade and shield, or a glaive. The idea that the glaive can be used with a shield is quite a leap without the support of the models' design and the pictures. 

 

I'm not saying that you're wrong or that I disagree, I just don't understand how anyone would come to that conclusion based on the wording of the text. (not arguing, just voicing my discontent).

Edited December 4, 2018 by Kharneth

[flamingwalnut]

1 hour ago, Kharneth said:

"equipped with" and "armed with" are essentially the same thing. What GW expects to be used as rules and to be used as useless extra words is hardly clear.

"A unit of Kairic Acolytes has 10 or more models. Each unit fights with a variety of weapons; some of the Acolytes are armed with a single Cursed Blade while others carry Paired Cursed Blades. Some instead carry a Cursed Blade and an Arcanite Shield. Three in every ten models in the unit can be armed with double-handed Cursed Glaives."

When wielding the glaives, where does it say that we can also have a shield and/or not replace the shield? The way it's written, it implies that any single acolyte can be armed with a single blade, paired blades, a blade and shield, or a glaive. The idea that the glaive can be used with a shield is quite a leap without the support of the models' design and the pictures. 

 

I'm not saying that you're wrong or that I disagree, I just don't understand how anyone would come to that conclusion based on the wording of the text. (not arguing, just voicing my discontent).

Nah, you look to be right. I thought it was worded different, like you add the shield on later. A lot of units have the "Armed with X, Y, or Z. Some may take a shield." It appears these guys are not. My bad.

Though, wording like double handed do still seem to mean nothing, and cause nothing but confusion and rules intention arguments. Like with thr Duardin Warriors I mentioned ealier.

[Kharneth]

46 minutes ago, flamingwalnut said:

Nah, you look to be right. I thought it was worded different, like you add the shield on later. A lot of units have the "Armed with X, Y, or Z. Some may take a shield." It appears these guys are not. My bad.

Though, wording like double handed do still seem to mean nothing, and cause nothing but confusion and rules intention arguments. Like with thr Duardin Warriors I mentioned ealier.

I feel like the double-handed was added early and then when they changed their intention they missed the words and so they never got removed. Otherwise it's just blatantly adding confusion. It also frustrates me that the glaive sentence doesn't read "Three in every ten models in the unit can be armed with a double-handed Cursed Glaive" because it's written with plural glaives. I know what they mean, but the wording! 😅

The only counterargument I can provide is that the first step is to pick a) single blade, b) paired blades, or c) blade and shield. Then from here, 3 of them can be given a glaive as an additional weapon. So if you have all sword&board, 3 of them will also have glaives. 

Regardless of the way the rules are worded, it would feel unfair to tell my opponent he can't use his shields with his glaives since the models don't even come with two handed glaives. 

[newsun]

50 minutes ago, Kharneth said:

I feel like the double-handed was added early and then when they changed their intention they missed the words and so they never got removed. Otherwise it's just blatantly adding confusion. It also frustrates me that the glaive sentence doesn't read "Three in every ten models in the unit can be armed with a double-handed Cursed Glaive" because it's written with plural glaives. I know what they mean, but the wording! 😅

The only counterargument I can provide is that the first step is to pick a) single blade, b) paired blades, or c) blade and shield. Then from here, 3 of them can be given a glaive as an additional weapon. So if you have all sword&board, 3 of them will also have glaives. 

Regardless of the way the rules are worded, it would feel unfair to tell my opponent he can't use his shields with his glaives since the models don't even come with two handed glaives. 

RAW this is how it's stated. Sword & board plus glaive for 3/10. Meaning more attacks from those three models. 

[Kharneth]

26 minutes ago, newsun said:

RAW this is how it's stated. Sword & board plus glaive for 3/10. Meaning more attacks from those three models. 

Now you're just being ridiculous.

[Reezark_SP]

Regarding the rule change for Tzaangor's shields but not Acolyte's shields, the rule for both units is called Arcanite Shield and since Arcanite Shield was updated in the Tzaangor's warcroll in the BoC book, the update still applies to Acolytes as they also have Arcanite Shield. 

Yes I agree its very convoluted to refer to a warscroll to a different unit in a different book thats just what I've been told.

[newsun]

4 hours ago, Kharneth said:

Now you're just being ridiculous.

I'm just pointing out RAW. I disagree it's how intended. If we don't point out the unclarity how can they be cleared up?

3 hours ago, Reezark_SP said:

Regarding the rule change for Tzaangor's shields but not Acolyte's shields, the rule for both units is called Arcanite Shield and since Arcanite Shield was updated in the Tzaangor's warcroll in the BoC book, the update still applies to Acolytes as they also have Arcanite Shield. 

Yes I agree its very convoluted to refer to a warscroll to a different unit in a different book thats just what I've been told.

Well the Tzaangor rule only applies to units of Tzaangors so it then won't do anything for acolytes. I get where you are going with this, however RAW does not support this translation without FAQ or errata.

[Kharneth]

I battled my friend's 1,000 point Skaven list on Tuesday and will be facing them again on Sunday. Him and I plan to continue using these same lists until January when he will start shifting to his Maggotkin/Slaves army. 

Skaven Chieftan(?) with helmet that gives immune to battleshock within 3". Grey Seer with Vermintide that is consistently unbound. 2x10 clanrats, 1x25 clanrats, 4 ratling guns, and a Hellpit Abomination.

VS

Gaunt Summoner (no familiars, yet) with Arcane Sacrifice and Glimpse the Future. Lord of Change with Mark of the Conjurer and Bolt of Tzeentch. 2x10 Kairic Acolytes, 1x10 Pink Horrors with Unchecked Mutation (might swap for Fold Reality), Quicksilver Swords, and Chronomantic Cogs.

We played Border War, which included an objective in both of our deployment zones that were each worth 1 to the defender and 4 for the attacker, plus 2 objectives on either flank of the center line each worth 2. I deployed first and chose to go first, not sure if this was the right decision. I wanted to secure the objectives as early as possible and knew that his rats would be fast enough to get to the objectives if they went first and then I couldn't summon on the objectives. When I took the first turn I ended up moving too far forward, securing both midline objectives with my Acolytes 3" behind and my blue horrors 3" in front. 

Moving forward like I did, lagging in the center with my Pink Horrors and LoC about 6" behind, I feel like I put too much stuff forward. On his first turn he was able to charge my blue horrors with his Hellpit Abomination. He also charged my other blue horrors with 10 clanrats on the other side of the board. Neither of his units were able to get within 3" of the objective on this turn due to my placement. His other clanrats ran forward swarming the center while his ratling guns killed some acolytes and blue horrors. Unfortunately, he won the roll-off and was able to go first on turn 2. I'm not entirely sure if my loss was due to moving too far forward or if it was due to this unlucky situation, though this happens to me pretty frequently. On his second turn his abomination and chieftan secured the left objective while 10 clanrats battled my blue horrors and another 10 clanrats battled my acolytes on the right flank. The large swarm of 25 charged my LoC and Pink Horrors. From here I was just continually pushed back. I was able to hold the right flank and most of the battle ended up being over my home objective, which was worth 1 point to me and 4 to my enemy. 

The game ended on turn 5 with extremely high casualties on both sides, but with him at 23 vp and I had 16. I had my gaunt summoner and 10 blue horrors remaining, he had 1 clanrat, his chieftan, hellpit abomination, 3 ratling guns with 1 wound, and his grey seer. 

 

What I'm wondering is where I should direct my damage, specifically the spells. I failed a lot more spells than I expected (Infernal Gateway rolled double 1s when I needed it and Infernal Flames was either unsuccessful or unbound for the entire game), but the spells that did go off primarily targeted the Hellpit. Due to failing Infernal Gateway, Bolt of Tzeentch dealing 1 mortal wound, and taking damage on the LoC before being able to cast again I was unable to deal significant damage to the Hellpit, which heals d3 wounds in its hero phase. I'm thinking next time I might focus on the ratling guns and chieftan so that he loses his ranged damage and can't keep his 25 clanrat unit immune to battleshock instead of focusing on the Hellpit. If I really want to kill the Hellpit I need to either deal 12 wounds to it in a single turn or be able to deal 15 wounds to it over 2 turns without him getting a double turn. 

Edited December 6, 2018 by Kharneth

[mmimzie]

7 hours ago, Kharneth said:

I battled my friend's 1,000 point Skaven list on Tuesday and will be facing them again on Sunday. Him and I plan to continue using these same lists until January when he will start shifting to his Maggotkin/Slaves army. 

Skaven Chieftan(?) with helmet that gives immune to battleshock within 3". Grey Seer with Vermintide that is consistently unbound. 2x10 clanrats, 1x25 clanrats, 4 ratling guns, and a Hellpit Abomination.

VS

Gaunt Summoner (no familiars, yet) with Arcane Sacrifice and Glimpse the Future. Lord of Change with Mark of the Conjurer and Bolt of Tzeentch. 2x10 Kairic Acolytes, 1x10 Pink Horrors with Unchecked Mutation (might swap for Fold Reality), Quicksilver Swords, and Chronomantic Cogs.

snip

So for this one it's important to know your list and what is going to happen with. At 1k pts, a single unit of pinks, and just quick silver swords you can only throw up one far afield wall.  Also you have no fast forces to quickly move up ahead of your quick lord of change so your lrod of chagne shouldn't move faster than his minions. 

Your LoC and Gaunt summoners in this force are basicly immortal once you get rid of the ratlings. They are also the thing in your army killing everything next to your pink horrors. 

 One thing too to consider. Firestorm actualy is pretty alright on the LoC as the +1 to cast doesn't actualy effect  you chances of casting bolt on the LoC however the +1 does make it so you cast firestorm just as easily as you cast bolt of change. Just sort of had a hard think on that the other day. 

Okay so the game. First looking at the pts  the middle and your opponents seem the most important to you, but let me put this needle in your brain. If you look at the net pts in the game or that is to say looking at the pts you could have gain + the pts your opponent could gain. Both home objectives are actualy a 5 pt swing, while the two middle ones are just a 4pt swing. Meaning the home objective, and the one you are start in the best position to secure are actualy worth the most in the over all scheme of the game. 

Game play wise so long at the ratlings die your LoC  and Gaunt summoner are actualy invulnerable to damage. Which is another reason you might want to consider swaping the cogs for the spell portal, and maybe taking the feather charm or ethereal amulet for LoC durability. 

Other than your hero durability the next take away should be that you don't need to play every turn like you need to score more than your opponent. You merely need to play the whole game with the thought of scoring more than your opponent. Which means you should take time to secure your home objectives and one of the border objectives. If your opponent take the other two that's okay. Numberwise if you play well you should out number your opponent, and mobility wise the moment you get the chance you can move your LoC 6-10" and then summoning blue horros 12" away from that to quickly score either your opponents home objectives or the other border.

So in saying that i would have summoned the blues onto one of the border objectives. using a 4+ destiny die to run  a acolyte unit up the field to insure the numbers are in your favor.  There, and abandon the other border objective. This would insure you survive any possible double turn. As AoS forces you to be alittle conservative as the double turn threat punishes greedy play pretty hard. 

Aim to kill that rattling squad and the 25 man unit. The helpit might suck abit, but your screens should hold enough against that so that you only have to deal with the abom maybe turn 3 or 4. When ever you get the chance summon some blues onto the opposite border objectives after using your LoC or gaunt summoner's spells in the hero phase to kill the forces there.  You only need to hold 1 other objective once to win the game, so take your time and secure your two zones. Don't spread thin and spend all your resources making sure that you stay even until you are in control and have a turn where you can strike out and score 1 more objective.