AoS 2 - Stormcast Eternals Discussion

[PJetski]

2 hours ago, Raffonerd said:

If you check in GA19 they say that allies don't count for allegiance abilities btw. It's tricky.

Allies cant benefit from allegiance abilities, but they would still count as a deployed unit for the purposes of Scions of the Storm.

 

Long Shot is always active in the hero phase. Going to copy my response from the last time this question came up:

"Add 6" to the Range characteristic of this unit’s Longstrike Crossbows if this unit did not move in the movement phase of the same turn."

The way the ability is worded the 6" bonus range is always active unless you do the specific action to disable it. Since it does not specify "in the shooting phase" then it is active in all phases, even if the hero phase comes before the movement phase. 

It may seem strange at first, but warscroll abilities break the normal rules of the game quite frequently. 

Edited October 25, 2019 by PJetski

[DJMoose]

7 hours ago, CommissarRotke said:

@DJMoose so liquid green stuff is worth it then? I've been eyeing it up to fill in some terrible gaps on secondhand models I bought to fix my Soul Wars unit numbers... But I've heard bad reviews about a lot of the pots being dried out (or drying out quickly).

Yeah. Had to exchange the pot I bought for another one at my local GW. I have heard of it drying out quickly, so I plan on putting together my Thundercats before that happens.

It works rather well, though. A couple of coats instead of globbing it in works better. And after it dries you can file it down smooth.

Edited October 25, 2019 by DJMoose

[Mark Williams]

1 hour ago, PJetski said:

Allies cant benefit from allegiance abilities, but they would still count as a deployed unit for the purposes of Scions of the Storm.

 

Long Shot is always active in the hero phase. Going to copy my response from the last time this question came up:

"Add 6" to the Range characteristic of this unit’s Longstrike Crossbows if this unit did not move in the movement phase of the same turn."

The way the ability is worded the 6" bonus range is always active unless you do the specific action to disable it. Since it does not specify "in the shooting phase" then it is active in all phases, even if the hero phase comes before the movement phase. 

It may seem strange at first, but warscroll abilities break the normal rules of the game quite frequently. 

I feel obliged to point out there’s another equally valid interpretation of the wording, and that is that the bonus does not activate until you have the opportunity to make a choice to move. Your interpretation is is an opinion until it’s FAQed, as is mine.

[Raffonerd]

5 minutes ago, Mark Williams said:

I feel obliged to point out there’s another equally valid interpretation of the wording, and that is that the bonus does not activate until you have the opportunity to make a choice to move. Your interpretation is is an opinion until it’s FAQed, as is mine.

Yeah. I think that GW will FAQ this soon. Also Sisters of the watch now has the same wording. While in the past they had in the shooting phase that was more clear to interpreter. From what I can desume from London GT lists the range is 30". Because Sam Saunders was playing without relictor. This means that he was not able to move raptors during the game.

By that it would be clear that he was shooting from 30" (in either phases) and no from 24"

Edited October 25, 2019 by Raffonerd

[Mark Williams]

10 minutes ago, Raffonerd said:

Yeah. I think that GW will FAQ this soon. Also Sisters of the watch now has the same wording. While in the past they had in the shooting phase that was more clear to interpreter. From what I can desume from London GT lists the range is 30". Because Sam Saunders was playing without relictor. This means that he was not able to move raptors during the game.

By that it would be clear that he was shooting from 30" (in either phases) and no from 24"

Right. My concern is two-fold.

1) The previous tome had different wording on the raptors, which clearly wouldn’t have allowed it. I’m worried the change in wording was just a poor gaf from rules writers trying to save space and not realising they were making it too vague.

2) Whenever I see a rule that has two valid interpretations, I prefer to err on the side of my opponents rather than myself. I see this as good sportsmanship.

I’ll wait for an FAQ before I use it. I’m not trying to tell others how to play - I only want to be allowed to express  what I feel is an equally valid opinion. I think it’s vaguely worded and not clear.

[schwabbele]

Currently RAW it’s 30“ , waywatcher hero has an ability which shows how it could be worded to be 24“.  Anyhow ask a TO for ruling prior to the event or in a friendly game just use 24“ . 

[armisael]

It seem that even we are 2.0 battletomb. Our rule is already outdate.  i.e. we are still "re-roll failed hit roll" while the other already change to "Re-roll hit roll".

[Kevin K]

Thanks everyone for the help on LongShot.  It sounds like there still isn't a consensus.  Hopefully there will be an FAQ.  Personally, I think it is usable in the hero phase but understand the other argument.

[schwabbele]

Evocator warscroll fixed with latest aos app update

[Hodges]

I honestly cant understand how anyone could claim that Longstrikes benefit from +6" in the Hero phase.

Much like other war games, AOS has a rigid turn structure. Hero, Movement, Shooting etc. The Longstrike ability says "Add 6" to the range characteristic of the units Crossbows if it did not move in the movement phase of the same turn". So when you go to shoot, you apply the check - have I moved in the movement phase. Outside the obvious yes/no answer (for shooting in the shooting phase), there is a third answer - not applicable. If you havent had a movement phase this turn, you cannot say you havent moved in it - it simply hasnt happened yet. And if you cant answer the check that the rule asks for, then you cant use the rule. 

And ive seen people claim that its an always on effect - the text does not support that. There are plenty of examples in this game of things in this game that are like that and this is not one of them. The rule could have said "this unit gains +6" to its range until its next movement phase, if it doesnt move this turn". It doesnt, it asks to check a requirement - that to me makes it clear as day that it isnt an always on ability. 

[Karragon]

1 hour ago, Hodges said:

I honestly cant understand how anyone could claim that Longstrikes benefit from +6" in the Hero phase.

Much like other war games, AOS has a rigid turn structure. Hero, Movement, Shooting etc. The Longstrike ability says "Add 6" to the range characteristic of the units Crossbows if it did not move in the movement phase of the same turn". So when you go to shoot, you apply the check - have I moved in the movement phase. Outside the obvious yes/no answer (for shooting in the shooting phase), there is a third answer - not applicable. If you havent had a movement phase this turn, you cannot say you havent moved in it - it simply hasnt happened yet. And if you cant answer the check that the rule asks for, then you cant use the rule. 

And ive seen people claim that its an always on effect - the text does not support that. There are plenty of examples in this game of things in this game that are like that and this is not one of them. The rule could have said "this unit gains +6" to its range until its next movement phase, if it doesnt move this turn". It doesnt, it asks to check a requirement - that to me makes it clear as day that it isnt an always on ability. 

I honestly can't understand how anyone could claim that Longstrikes don't benefit from the +6" in the Hero phase.

It's a simple logic test "did they move in the movement phase of this turn" the answer is no. The fact that it hasn't happened yet is irrelevant, they have not moved in the movement phase so they get it. To try and apply any other logic to it makes them Schrödinger's Longstrikes.

[Maturin]

1 hour ago, Hodges said:

I honestly cant understand how anyone could claim that Longstrikes benefit from +6" in the Hero phase

Why do you hate us so much ? Can't we have a bit of love from GW too ?

Edited October 26, 2019 by Maturin

[Mark Williams]

3 hours ago, Maturin said:

Why do you hate us so much ? Can't we have a bit of love from GW too ?

It’s not hate, it’s just cold logic and pragmatism. Both points of view are perfectly valid interpretations of the rule, and completely RAW. The problem is that the argument is not flawed. It has nothing to do with wanting to hate on them. We need an FAQ.

[Maturin]

14 minutes ago, Mark Williams said:

It’s not hate, it’s just cold logic and pragmatism. Both points of view are perfectly valid interpretations of the rule, and completely RAW. The problem is that the argument is not flawed. It has nothing to do with wanting to hate on them. We need an FAQ.

I was obviously joking mate

[Mark Williams]

1 hour ago, Maturin said:

I was obviously joking mate

Blah, sorry. I'm just a bit frazzled cause this keeps popping up every few weeks. I wish GW would read forums like this to get a sense of what players need answers on. I've sent an e-mail to that FAQ e-mail, but I'm not even sure they would've understood the question.

Edited October 26, 2019 by Mark Williams

[PJetski]

5 hours ago, Hodges said:

I honestly cant understand how anyone could claim that Longstrikes benefit from +6" in the Hero phase.

Much like other war games, AOS has a rigid turn structure. Hero, Movement, Shooting etc. The Longstrike ability says "Add 6" to the range characteristic of the units Crossbows if it did not move in the movement phase of the same turn". So when you go to shoot, you apply the check - have I moved in the movement phase. Outside the obvious yes/no answer (for shooting in the shooting phase), there is a third answer - not applicable. If you havent had a movement phase this turn, you cannot say you havent moved in it - it simply hasnt happened yet. And if you cant answer the check that the rule asks for, then you cant use the rule. 

And ive seen people claim that its an always on effect - the text does not support that. There are plenty of examples in this game of things in this game that are like that and this is not one of them. The rule could have said "this unit gains +6" to its range until its next movement phase, if it doesnt move this turn". It doesnt, it asks to check a requirement - that to me makes it clear as day that it isnt an always on ability. 

It's not a matter of opinion... if you read the rule then there is only one correct interpretation. Anyone arguing against that interpretation are deluding themselves and others because they dont like the way the rule works (or maybe they just like arguing).

It's a binary condition - your unit has either moved in the movement phase, or it hasn't. You can't make up a third state for a binary condition; that's not logical. If you haven't had a movement phase yet then the condition is satisfied and the bonus range applies. If they had some way to shoot in the enemy turn then they would also get the bonus range in that scenario.

If they didn't intend for it to work outside of the player shooting phase they would have specified "in the shooting phase" or "in the next shooting phase". Many abilities in the game are worded to work only work in a specific phase, and this is not one of them.

Play the rule as it is written instead of assuming they wrote it wrong. The book has been out for over a year - there has been more than enough time for them to issue an errata.

[Mark Williams]

27 minutes ago, PJetski said:

It's not a matter of opinion... if you read the rule then there is only one correct interpretation. Anyone arguing against that interpretation are deluding themselves and others because they dont like the way the rule works (or maybe they just like arguing).

It's a binary condition - your unit has either moved in the movement phase, or it hasn't. You can't make up a third state for a binary condition; that's not logical. If you haven't had a movement phase yet then the condition is satisfied and the bonus range applies. If they had some way to shoot in the enemy turn then they would also get the bonus range in that scenario.

If they didn't intend for it to work outside of the player shooting phase they would have specified "in the shooting phase" or "in the next shooting phase". Many abilities in the game are worded to work only work in a specific phase, and this is not one of them.

Play the rule as it is written instead of assuming they wrote it wrong. The book has been out for over a year - there has been more than enough time for them to issue an errata.

I'm a programmer by trade. Binary objects in databases often have a third null state until they've been asserted to a value. There's no lapse in logic here. If I saw this issue while I was writing a program, I would talk to the client or customer and get clarification on what they wanted to happen. I wouldn't assume it's one or the other, but in general if I couldn't get an answer I would side with the null option rather than assuming it's one of the binary states.

It's a valid interpretation of the rule. I'm conceding your point of view is also a valid conclusion. You're the one who is being close-minded here. I'm sorry that you won't or can't see it, and I'm at my wit's end on how to explain it more clearly to you.

Edit: as to the fact that the book has been out so long and this hasn't been addressed. We've seen many issues like this go unresolved for years without getting an FAQ. I'd argue that, for whatever reason, SCE is one of those armies that just doesn't pop up on GW's radar very often. From what little insight I've seen into the environment at their offices, most people play narrative driven armies, and they "magpie" around different armies playing whatever is new or interesting. I also get a sense that they have created a little bit of a bubble community around themselves. So it wouldn't surprise me in the least if there's not an Anvils-raptor heavy army in their group, and that this issue just simply never came up.

I also find that sometimes if someone likes the way a rule works, and they suspect it might have a different interpretation, they keep that thought to themselves and are very slow to bring it to anyone's attention.

Just a few months back, we saw a battle report where they were putting all of their sky units in the sky before they put any units on the table, and they said in the report that it was a "very strategic feature of the stormcast army". Yet the matched play community as a whole is (as far as I know) completely unanimous that the wording of the rules don't support doing that. My point is that they are not infallible and obviously make mistakes or miss things that have been out for years, just like everyone else. The amount of time this has gone without getting FAQed isn't proof to me that anyone has looked at it or thought about it and said, "nah it's clear, it doesn't need anything." My automatic assumption is just simply that they are busy playing other armies and doing other things, and this issue just simply hasn't come across their attention spans.

Edited October 26, 2019 by Mark Williams

[FattBooM666]

On 10/25/2019 at 9:34 PM, Kevin K said:

Thanks everyone for the help on LongShot.  It sounds like there still isn't a consensus.  Hopefully there will be an FAQ.  Personally, I think it is usable in the hero phase but understand the other argument.

Every friend I play says is ok, been tournament and TO and players there say it's ok.  

 

Why not use this energy elsewhere.. 🤷‍♂️

[Mark Williams]

35 minutes ago, FattBooM666 said:

Every friend I play says is ok, been tournament and TO and players there say it's ok.  

 

Why not use this energy elsewhere.. 🤷‍♂️

 I'm fine and happy if that's the way the community at large wants to play it. I'm only taking issue with the absolute confidence that it is a clearly written rule with no room for any other interpretation. If people said, "Well it could be this or that because of X and Y, but I think there's enough evidence to say that it works this way instead of that way," I wouldn't say anything. But instead it's, "This way is the only way, and the other way can't possibly be valid." It's the principle of the issue that I'm concerned about, not the outcome.

And please understand, the reason for that is that, for whatever reason, I want to play a fair game. I don't like winning because I found some kind of word-smith loophole and got everybody to agree with my interpretation of it. Even if everyone else is fine with it, I don't feel satisfied with the win afterwards. Instead I feel like I may have manipulated the system in order to win, rather than just playing a good game.

I'd like a more clear ruling from GW. In a tournament, I'd ask a TO before I used it. If they said yes, then in that small context my conscience would be satisfied.

Edited October 26, 2019 by Mark Williams

[Kelsicle]

So what do non-Longstrike lists look like at the moment? I’m a big fan of the sequitor models so want to lean into them and the Sacrosanct chamber. What heroes are needed to support an Evocator/Sequitor heavy list?

[AdamR]

6 hours ago, Kelsicle said:

So what do non-Longstrike lists look like at the moment? I’m a big fan of the sequitor models so want to lean into them and the Sacrosanct chamber. What heroes are needed to support an Evocator/Sequitor heavy list?

Lord Arcanum to make the sequitors battleline.

Lord Castellant to make them tanky.

Knight Heraldor to give the evocators a bigger threat range.

[l1censetochill]

15 hours ago, Kelsicle said:

So what do non-Longstrike lists look like at the moment? I’m a big fan of the sequitor models so want to lean into them and the Sacrosanct chamber. What heroes are needed to support an Evocator/Sequitor heavy list?

If you want a generic, well-rounded Sacrosanct list that folds in a little bit of everything, I put together the following as my first Stormcast list after buying Soul Wars:

-----

Allegiance: Stormcast Eternals
Mortal Realm: Aqshy

Leaders
Lord-Arcanum on Gryph-Charger (220)
- General
- Trait: Staunch Defender
- Artefact: Ignax's Scales
- Spell: Azyrite Halo
Lord-Castellant (120)
Knight-Incantor (140)
- Spell: Lightning Blast
Lord-Ordinator (140)

Battleline
10 x Sequitors (260)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
- 5x Stormsmite Greatmaces
5 x Sequitors (130)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
- 3x Stormsmite Greatmaces
5 x Sequitors (130)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
- 3x Stormsmite Greatmaces

Units
5 x Evocators (220)
- 5x Grandstaves
- Lore of Invigoration: Speed of Lightning
3 x Evocators on Dracolines (300)
- 2x Grandstaves
- Lore of Invigoration: Celestial Blades

War Machines
Celestar Ballista (110)
Celestar Ballista (110)
Celestar Ballista (110)

Total: 1990 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 0
Allies: 0 / 400
Wounds: 114

-----

It's not a very competitive list, but if you're playing friendlies at your local store it can hold up fine for the most part. It's pretty good for starting out, too, as it does a bit of everything and is active in all phases. I actually played my first game with the Cleansing Phalanx battalion in place of the third Celestar Ballista (I didn't have it painted yet), but I think the third Ballista is probably better.

With that list now fully painted, I'm pivoting toward the following:

-----

Allegiance: Stormcast Eternals
- Stormhost: Celestial Vindicators

Leaders
Lord-Arcanum on Celestial Dracoline (220)
- General
- Trait: Single-minded Fury
- Artefact: Stormrage Blade
- Spell: Celestial Blades
- Mount Trait: Pride Leader
Knight-Heraldor (100)
Lord-Ordinator (140)
Knight-Incantor (140)
- Spell: Lightning Blast

Battleline
5 x Sequitors (130)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
- 3x Stormsmite Greatmaces
5 x Sequitors (130)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
- 3x Stormsmite Greatmaces
5 x Sequitors (130)
- Stormsmite Mauls and Soulshields
- 3x Stormsmite Greatmaces

Units
6 x Evocators on Dracolines (600)
- 4x Grandstaves
- Lore of Invigoration: Celestial Blades

War Machines
Celestar Ballista (110)
Celestar Ballista (110)
Celestar Ballista (110)

Endless Spells / Terrain / CPs
Chronomantic Cogs (80)

Total: 2000 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 0
Allies: 0 / 400
Wounds: 103

-----

There are definitely other (and arguably better) ways to build a Dracoline list, but I'm going for this one mostly because it doesn't use many new models compared to what I'm already running (just 3 more Dracolines, a Knight-Heraldor, the Cogs, and the Astreia Solbright model for a general). I think most Dracoline lists use Liberators to cover battleline, which lets them sneak in a few more points elsewhere, but I think this list is fine overall and will be a fun change of pace from what I posted above. Hope this helps!

Edit: To give credit where it's due, and to direct anyone interested in Dracoline lists, I should thank @PJetski and point out that he's posted a guide to how he likes to build them here. It was written last year, well before the point changes in the 2019 GHB, but it's still helpful as a reference.

Edited October 27, 2019 by l1censetochill

[Sir Mercury]

Hi lads and ladybugs! Does anybody here got the warscroll of Lynus Ghalmorian in high resolution they want to share?

[Nizrah]

Can Evocators manipulate cogs?

[Mark Williams]

2 minutes ago, Nizrah said:

Can Evocators manipulate cogs?

Yes as long as there are two models, they count as a wizard. (Pick which model is going to manipulate it .) I don’t think they can cast it though.

Edited October 27, 2019 by Mark Williams