AoS 2 - Sylvaneth Discussion

[Kaylethia]

@IndigoGirls I looked through my warscroll cards (no keyword bold for wyldwoods, bold for stuff like sylvaneth and sylvaneth hero) and the app (keyword bold isn't a thing there I guess, nor is there a wyldwood warscroll present), finally settling on the warscrolls from the web store. The wyldwood references are in keyword bold, while citadel wood isn't. I won't use it until GW has said it one way or the other, but wouldn't hold it against my opponent if they wanted to play it the way you do. 

[IndigoGirls]

3 hours ago, Kaylethia said:

@IndigoGirls I looked through my warscroll cards (no keyword bold for wyldwoods, bold for stuff like sylvaneth and sylvaneth hero) and the app (keyword bold isn't a thing there I guess, nor is there a wyldwood warscroll present), finally settling on the warscrolls from the web store. The wyldwood references are in keyword bold, while citadel wood isn't. I won't use it until GW has said it one way or the other, but wouldn't hold it against my opponent if they wanted to play it the way you do. 

Good investigation! Perhaps I'll go back to how you've been playing it. I was ignoring the change until my play partner brought it up and thought the citadel wood change would affect wyldwoods. At that point I switched over and started using the new rule.

[Justinbot]

Hey all I'm pretty sure GW confirmed on Facebook that Sylvaneth Wyldwoods do not get the bonus from the new Citadel Woods warscroll. I just tried looking for the post and couldn't find it. They do have two different warscrolls so that makes sense.

Edited July 20, 2018 by Justinbot

[Kelbesq]

On 7/20/2018 at 10:53 AM, Justinbot said:

Hey all I'm pretty sure GW confirmed on Facebook that Sylvaneth Wyldwoods do not get the bonus from the new Citadel Woods warscroll. I just tried looking for the post and couldn't find it. They do have two different warscrolls so that makes sense.

I found this earlier:

[Nick in York]

From the newly updated Designer's Commentry for Sylvaneth Battletome:

"Q: Does the Overgrown Wilderness scenery rule apply to the 
Citadel Woods that make up a Sylvaneth Wyldwood?
A: Yes."

[KaguyaQuincy]

1 hour ago, Nick in York said:

From the newly updated Designer's Commentry for Sylvaneth Battletome:

"Q: Does the Overgrown Wilderness scenery rule apply to the 
Citadel Woods that make up a Sylvaneth Wyldwood?
A: Yes."

 

This is insanely huge. The full ramifications of this will start to become clear over the next few weeks but my god this is big news.

[Dallaen]

I find it hard to believe people even questioned this.  I mean it specifically says that a Wyldwood is made up of Citadel woods.  That alone would confer the traits of a Citadel wood right into a Wyldwood.  Glad to see they didn't change anything and kept all the woods rules consistent. 

[Justinbot]

3 hours ago, Nick in York said:

From the newly updated Designer's Commentry for Sylvaneth Battletome:

"Q: Does the Overgrown Wilderness scenery rule apply to the 
Citadel Woods that make up a Sylvaneth Wyldwood?
A: Yes."

Whoa! Thanks for letting us know. That's huge!

10 minutes ago, Dallaen said:

I find it hard to believe people even questioned this.  I mean it specifically says that a Wyldwood is made up of Citadel woods.  That alone would confer the traits of a Citadel wood right into a Wyldwood.  Glad to see they didn't change anything and kept all the woods rules consistent. 

Pretty easy to believe considering GW stated otherwise through their Facebook account... edit: on second thought their response is a little vague. Honestly it could of been read both ways I'm glad they cleared it up officially.

Edited July 23, 2018 by Justinbot

[Dallaen]

Just now, Justinbot said:

Whoa! Thanks for letting us know. That's huge!

Pretty easy to believe considering GW stated otherwise through their Facebook account...

honestly the person that answered that wrong without getting clarification should not be allowed to answer questions any more.   Still i'm glad they stayed consistent and didn't make it super complicated for different woods on a table.  One nice general rule is best.

[Aezeal]

46 minutes ago, Dallaen said:

honestly the person that answered that wrong without getting clarification should not be allowed to answer questions any more.   Still i'm glad they stayed consistent and didn't make it super complicated for different woods on a table.  One nice general rule is best.

They should add the rule to the wildwood warscroll if they want a wildwood to have it, anything else is stupid

[Justinbot]

I wonder how much deliberation went into determining this rule. I'm sure it was discussed in detail but part me thinks it went something like:

"Hey, we forgot to update the Wyldwood warscroll. People are wondering if Wyldwoods block line of sight now."

"Uh... sure?"

"Sounds good! It's in the errata now, let's get lunch!" ?

 

Edited July 23, 2018 by Justinbot

[Mirage8112]

1 hour ago, Dallaen said:

honestly the person that answered that wrong without getting clarification should not be allowed to answer questions any more.   Still i'm glad they stayed consistent and didn't make it super complicated for different woods on a table.  One nice general rule is best.

Technically the Warhammer community staff (the guys who run the FB page) are discouraged from making ruling interpretations exactly for this reason. Most of the time when you ask they decline to comment, and instead pass the question onto their rules team to avoid exactly this kind of back an forth. however, it is kind of nice to get some sort of official interpretation before the Official official FAQ is released. 
 

55 minutes ago, Aezeal said:

They should add the rule to the wildwood warscroll if they want a wildwood to have it, anything else is stupid

Lol. Thats not how they do things in AoS. Wyldwoods are a group of woods. The woods have their own rules. 

 

[Nick in York]

24 minutes ago, Justinbot said:

I wonder how much deliberation went into determining this rule. I'm sure it was discussed in detail but part me thinks it went something like:

"Hey, we forgot to update the Wyldwood warscroll. People are wondering if Wyldwoods block line of sight now."

"Uh... sure?"

"Sounds good! It's in the errata now, let's get lunch!" ?

 

Yeah, this is how I imagine it going down too.

[Freejack02]

It looks like the Wyldwood no longer has a warscroll in the app (ios), and the GW page "Rules" tab just links to the outdated Compendium Scenery document. Where on earth do I find the specific wording of the Overgrown Wilderness rule?

Edited July 23, 2018 by Freejack02

[Mirage8112]

Man, things are sure chugging along with AoS 2.0...

The FAQ drop today means we now have a full picture of what AoS looks like for the next year. In the last edition I played Dreadwood competitively, and while still my main go-to for competitive play, I think I'm going to put together something a little different for AoS 2.0. Here's what I'm thinking:

Allegiance: Sylvaneth
Mortal Realm: Hysh
Spirit of Durthu (380)
- General
- Trait: Gift of Ghyran  
- Artefact: Ironbark Talisman  
Branchwraith (80)
- Artefact: Lens of Refraction 
- Deepwood Spell: Regrowth
Branchwych (80)
- Artefact: Acorn of the Ages  
- Deepwood Spell: Regrowth
5 x Tree-Revenants (80)
5 x Tree-Revenants (80)
30 x Dryads (270)
9 x Endrinriggers (360)
- 2x Grapnel Launchers
Treelord (240)
Arkanaut Frigate (240)
Ironbark Wargrove (80)
Household (100)

Total: 1990 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 2
Allies: 0 / 400
Wounds: 106

A couple of things are in play here:

The army is from Hysh allowing me to take the lens of refraction for one of my items. I chose Hysh and the lens over Ghyran and ghyrstrike since the ironbark talisman grants Durthu +1 to wound, (as opposed to +1 to hit and wound) and there isn't another viable candidate in the battalion for that item. Secondly, Durthu is always a massive target, and with the frequency we're seeing magic used on the table (not to mention endless spells) anything that can reduce the damage output from spells is HUGE. Turning 3-4 wounds on Durthu into 1-2 is the difference between 6 damage and D6 damage making the Ironbark Talisman/lens combo more reliable over the course of the game than Ghyrstrike. 

The changes to how wyldwoods work now (denying LoS), is a big boon for us. But it also has some drawbacks that I'm pretty sure nobody has noticed yet. For example, hunters can no longer just sit in a wyldwood and shoot, since it seems to block line of sight into as well as out of a forest. That means abilities that require LoS don't work anymore if the distance to your target crosses over 1" of wood. Here, the frigate and enduring riggers will be very useful, since they can fly they ignore the LoS requirements. So the frigate can park near the woods and shoot without penalty. However, since it can shoot, they can also be shot/targeted with spells. So the riggers can just hang out in the boat repairing whatever wounds get through, that means the synergy between the frigate/lens/riggers/regrowth means it heals up to 2 wounds in the hero phase from the riggers and the 4+ roll ability, it reduces mortal wounds taken from spells by D3 (to a minimum of 1) and can heal up to an additional 2D3 from the Wych/Wraith's regrowth. 

I've got a highly mobile but still very fighty list. Two bethmoths that are super tough to kill, woods I can hide them in if things get rough , plenty of healing if i get into a tough spot, and a little magic support if I have endless spells to contend with.

Thoughts questions comments and observations are always appreciated. 
 

[Mirage8112]

4 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

It looks like the Wyldwood no longer has a warscroll in the app (ios), and the GW page "Rules" tab just links to the outdated Compendium Scenery document. Where on earth do I find the specific wording of the Overgrown Wilderness rule?

it's in the generals handbook under the scenery section: 

 

[ppetford]

Really happy that GW has addressed the Wyldwood question. Are people generally seeing the change as a good thing for the army?

I’ve not played a game with theses rules yet, and my initial reaction is it hurts us (or rather it hurts lists like Gnarlroot and Bow Hunters)

[Nick in York]

24 minutes ago, ppetford said:

Really happy that GW has addressed the Wyldwood question. Are people generally seeing the change as a good thing for the army?

I’ve not played a game with theses rules yet, and my initial reaction is it hurts us (or rather it hurts lists like Gnarlroot and Bow Hunters)

I see it as a mixed blessing. Yes, it means Bow Hunters/wizards casting most spells will not be able to hide in woods and fire out. But, as we will be placing the woods, it gives a boost to our (already fairly strong) board control abilities.

[tea_wild_owl]

and don't forget that you can still shoot/casts spells when one of the units can fly. so alarielle can shoot out of woods, and kurnoth onto flying targets (or need to stand at the edge of the forest to get both cover and los)

[romhi]

9 hours ago, Mirage8112 said:

it reduces mortal wounds taken from spells by D3 (to a minimum of 1)

Do you think the lens are really worth it considering that they can only be used once per battle round? It is possible that I am jaded from playing against Nagash or all the Tzeentch armies at my local shop but reducing the damage of one spell from the 8-10+ spells that I see incoming is a bit weak. I would rather use everything I have to delete as many caster as possible.

[Heksagon]

Playing with Woods will be quite fun now.
We can place them on objectives and teleport specyfic units to them. Examples:
- Branchwych on the Balewind Wortex + The Silverwood Circlet. She can spread mortal wounds around her (still hidden). You can also use Reaping.

- Drycha. Just like above.  Her Bees will be more useful now.

- Scythe Kurnoths hidden on the objective? Sure, go for it. It will be very painful for the enemy, because charging them will be risky (Woods), and they will be invisible to ranged non-flyers.

- Branchwraith will be our "Hidden Dryad Factory". You can hide her in the Wood and summon dryads every turn.

 

Any other ideas?

[Atreyu]

Regarding Drycha, are the Flitterfuries or the Swarlings better?  My idea is to glue these two onto a 25mm Base each, to keep both options.

[Ragnar72]

4 hours ago, Heksagon said:

Playing with Woods will be quite fun now.
We can place them on objectives and teleport specyfic units to them. Examples:
- Branchwych on the Balewind Wortex + The Silverwood Circlet. She can spread mortal wounds around her (still hidden). You can also use Reaping.

- Drycha. Just like above.  Her Bees will be more useful now.

- Scythe Kurnoths hidden on the objective? Sure, go for it. It will be very painful for the enemy, because charging them will be risky (Woods), and they will be invisible to ranged non-flyers.

- Branchwraith will be our "Hidden Dryad Factory". You can hide her in the Wood and summon dryads every turn.

 

Any other ideas?

Great ideas! But enemy flying models like skyfires and KO can still fire at us and also same enemy spells do not need lines of sight!

In general I am with you, that the LOS blocking is an advantage for us.

[Heksagon]

36 minutes ago, Ragnar72 said:

Great ideas! But enemy flying models like skyfires and KO can still fire at us and also same enemy spells do not need lines of sight!

In general I am with you, that the LOS blocking is an advantage for us.

That's true, but we can use it as our new trick. You can drop Bow Hunters into the Wood- they can shoot only flying units (and they're also visible to them), but other non flying units can't target them. So, you can shoot Skyfires and ignore for example Pink Horrors, because they can't target hidden Kurnoths.

[Kaylethia]

Is there any kind of confirmation that shooting flying targets ignored terrain effects? As I've read it, flying units ignore terrain effects, but I'm not sure this is a two-way interaction.

Glad we have confirmation on the woods working this way, it'll make things more interesting for sure.