Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Chris Tomlin

AoS 2 - Fyreslayers Discussion

Recommended Posts

There seems to be an ongoing controversy in one of the FB Fyreslayer groups about the Lords of the Lodge battalion and the seizing initiative rules. Following the rules as written, the Warscroll Battalion lets you modify a rolloff result, which is normally prohibited, but because current warscrolls take priority over core rules. Is there some sort of official ruling on this? Or does the battalion no longer function?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Almace038 said:

There seems to be an ongoing controversy in one of the FB Fyreslayer groups about the Lords of the Lodge battalion and the seizing initiative rules. Following the rules as written, the Warscroll Battalion lets you modify a rolloff result, which is normally prohibited, but because current warscrolls take priority over core rules. Is there some sort of official ruling on this? Or does the battalion no longer function?

I think GW made a mistake with the warscroll rule precedence. Why write universal rules like you can never reroll a reroll, change the initiativ roll, generate attacks from generated attacks etc... it is pointless. These rules have no meaning since they can be changed and are not universal...... But RAI they do have meaning so they vill have to run around and chase there own tail when writing rules going forward.

....so my opinion regarding LotL is just dont do it. 😋 But that's me.

Edited by Andreas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the rules frustration with the 2.0 launch has made things very awkward to say the least. In the more casual games I’ve been playing, my buddies’ LotL turn sniping has been a huge part of his strategy. So while I totally get that casual gameplay and interpretation gives lots of leeway, it is difficult to try and improve as players following the rules as carefully as possible when it seems like we have to check the FAQs, a myriad of other social media groups, and the core rules just to run into conjecture and assumptions if something hasn’t been directly FAQ’d.

Thank you though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If warscrolls take priority over core rules, then whats the controversy? Looks like wishful thinking on the part of people who want that battalion to be weaker.

Granted, its already worth it for the double pile-in, the second artifact (get an Alchemical Chain for them sweet sweet dispels) and the CP. With poleaxes, thats a lot of mortal wounds going off every combat round. So even if it didnt have turn roll shenanigans, it would be a good battalion IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in the tourney scene can you only take artifacts from your own book/ghb? or can you take land specific ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Bimli said:

in the tourney scene can you only take artifacts from your own book/ghb? or can you take land specific ones?

Depends on the tourney.

 

Technically Realm artifacts are Matched Play legal but some tourneys may choose to not use them.

Edited by kenshin620

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Deepkin said:

If warscrolls take priority over core rules, then whats the controversy? Looks like wishful thinking on the part of people who want that battalion to be weaker.

Granted, its already worth it for the double pile-in, the second artifact (get an Alchemical Chain for them sweet sweet dispels) and the CP. With poleaxes, thats a lot of mortal wounds going off every combat round. So even if it didnt have turn roll shenanigans, it would be a good battalion IMO.

because GW specifically targeted Lords of the Lodge for a nerf for matched play last year, and its obvious that is their intention even if you ram through the loophole that they forgot to keep up with that rule just like they messed up the rules of one for ripperdactyls infinite attacks. Anyone does well enough with it for GW to take notice and they'll close the loophole, so if you really want to be that guy in your gaming group, go for it, but just know that you're only going to be able to pull it off for a short time before they faq it, so don't get attached.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never used it, I was asking last page if anyone has used lists with it because I was curious about it. And not because of the stealing initiative roll, because of the double pile-in, which makes Hearthguard Berserkers sound fun to use, and would make for an army different than "take 30 aurics, 60 vulkites, and deep strike."

But hey, keep jumping to conclusions about my intentions or whatever. 

 

It may also be that I am confused about exactly what this controversy entails. The battalion says once per battle you can seize the initiative. Is that really what the controversy is about? 

Edited by Deepkin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My take on this whole Lords of the lodge controversy: While it may be true that this whole "warscrolls triumph over rules" makes lotd currently usable with its "seizing the turn for yourself", however... There are few things that indicate clearly that this is not the intention by gw:

1) Lotl was one of the most expensive batallions in the original ghb. Back then it took into account this powerful turn roll altering ability. Now it has standard price for cheap batallions and that is WITH artifact and command point thrown in.

2) Lotl is literally the only warscroll remaining where this turn altering stuff exists. No other ability can directly or indirectly alter turn roll. Why on earth would gw make fyreslayers exception when they have clearly intended that no-one touches turn roll ever?

3) You know it, I know it, that if Gw were to make errata addressing lotl/new battletome, lotl's turn roll altering would be gone for good, and I write this with 100% confidency. You may try to twist gw's rules to your favour, you may try to use RAW as some guideline, you may try throwing some bullcrap about "fyreslayers needing all the help they can get", but the fact is simply this: We all know this ability is not going to stay as is. If you claim to think otherwise, you're either lying to yourself or you haven't been paying any attention how gw has been handling ability controversies such as this lately.

Edited by angrycontra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, angrycontra said:

My take on this whole Lords of the lodge controversy: While it may be true that this whole "warscrolls triumph over rules" makes lotd currently usable with its "seizing the turn for yourself", however... There are few things that indicate clearly that this is not the intention by gw:

1) Lotl was one of the most expensive batallions in the original ghb. Back then it took into account this powerful turn roll altering ability. Now it has standard price for cheap batallions and that is WITH artifact and command point thrown in.

2) Lotl is literally the only warscroll remaining where this turn altering stuff exists. No other ability can directly or indirectly alter turn roll. Why on earth would gw make fyreslayers exception when they have clearly intended that no-one touches turn roll ever?

3) You know it, I know it, that if Gw were to make errata addressing lotl/new battletome, lotl's turn roll altering would be gone for good, and I write this with 100% confidency. You may try to twist gw's rules to your favour, you may try to use RAW as some guideline, you may try throwing some bullcrap about "fyreslayers needing all the help they can get", but the fact is simply this: We all know this ability is not going to stay as is. If you claim to think otherwise, you're either lying to yourself or you haven't been paying any attention how gw has been handling ability controversies such as this lately.

Understand the points you are making, but GW literally issued a new errata for fyreslayers Battletome yesterday and didn't touch the battallion. I think at this point it is fair to assume the warscroll should be interpreted how it's written

age_of_sigmar_fyreslayers_errata_en-1.pdf

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember GW going on about how one of the Everchosen battalions effects turn orders in the AOS 2 previews.  More to the point though, the rules are very clearly written (Just re-read the core rules, I'm assuming there isn't something like a rule of 1 in the Generals Handbook 2018 for rerolls I'm missing). It might change sure but then that's true of everything. The Fyreslayer preview said Runefathers and Runesons didn't need to be the general to use their command abilities. When they errata'd it with the AOS2 FAQ so they had to be the general I didn't tell my opponents "Well, that's clearly a mistake so I'm going to ignore that part of the rules and use their command abilities anyways".  No, I waited until they errata'd it again (yay!). 

You can houserule whatever you want with your group but calling out someone because they're playing by the rules of their army is just ridiculous. And a once per game bonus to the turn roll off is far from game breaking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Forrix said:

I remember GW going on about how one of the Everchosen battalions effects turn orders in the AOS 2 previews.  More to the point though, the rules are very clearly written (Just re-read the core rules, I'm assuming there isn't something like a rule of 1 in the Generals Handbook 2018 for rerolls I'm missing). It might change sure but then that's true of everything. The Fyreslayer preview said Runefathers and Runesons didn't need to be the general to use their command abilities. When they errata'd it with the AOS2 FAQ so they had to be the general I didn't tell my opponents "Well, that's clearly a mistake so I'm going to ignore that part of the rules and use their command abilities anyways".  No, I waited until they errata'd it again (yay!). 

You can houserule whatever you want with your group but calling out someone because they're playing by the rules of their army is just ridiculous. And a once per game bonus to the turn roll off is far from game breaking.

It's the single most important roll in the game and significantly game breaking and, again, GW isn't going to keep it around. Stop deluding yourself to think this is an intended rule. If you want to win a game that badly, go for it. But don't justify it by rules lawyering GW's mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how playing by the rules printed on the card is rules lawyering in any way, shape or form. There is nothing to "interpret," it's literally what the rules on the card say. It's nowhere near the "creative interpretation" required to do nonsense like the Lord of  Change on a Balewind, or the Anvils of the Heldenhammer CA spam. Hell, it's not even the most broken legal thing in the game right now. 

Perhaps take your sour grapes elsewhere. I'm quite certain it will be changed somehow as well, and my group has agreed to ignore that part of the warscroll for now just to sidestep the whole thing (I'm the only one interested in running it, and again, I only want Hearthguard that swing twice), but you're displaying an impressive amount of salt for something I'm fairly certain you've never been on the receiving end of in any recent tournament (because Fyreslayers, and Lords of the Lodge, have not placed very highly in any recent large tournaments, and are not a very popular army, at least where I live.) But until it gets changed, it's legal, and there are better ways to spend your time.

Edited by Deepkin
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been list building lately, I'd love some feedback!  

Battlesmith

Runesmitterx3

3x30 Vulkites

2xHelstrom rocket battery, allies ironweld arsenal 

It's your pretty standard fyreslayers tricks just with some ranged output allied in! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that runeson on foot did his command ability just become pretty good? is he usable now as a cheapo leader choice???

so the lotl has a rule which allows us to seize the turn clearly indicated in the rules and people are saying they can't use it? the faaak are peeps on. sure MAYBE that rule will be removed but until it is removed its totally legal or gw would of updated it in the recent faq...  also in the rule it clearly indicates and i quote "abilities take presedence over core rules" page 11 third point... so whats the issue here? what argument does someone have against that? the oh i believe gw is going to remove this so because i believe gw is going to remive this you can't use it.... If I was using lotl formation id use it seeing how its one of my abilities just like if i was playing against somone who has the rule i let then use it... just saying :)

Edited by Bimli
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, jake3991 said:

I've been list building lately, I'd love some feedback!  

Battlesmith

Runesmitterx3

3x30 Vulkites

2xHelstrom rocket battery, allies ironweld arsenal 

It's your pretty standard fyreslayers tricks just with some ranged output allied in! 

i assume you are teleporting your 3 units of vulkites so how will the battle smith keep up? id drop a runesmiter to keep 1 unit to protect your artillary. leaves you with 120 points to play with and maybe take a stronger character

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the runeson I think is the now go to leader. cheap as hell with a great command ability reroll 1s to wound for all attacks shooting and close combat that is pretty big

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+++ Mod Hat On +++

Just a gentle poke @stratigo, you are coming across as very negative. It's fine to disagree but your last few posts don't seem to be in the TGA ethos. Also in these cases, email AOSFAQ@gwplc.com as it may make it into the next FAQ if it needs to.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are some things you would like to see added to Fyreslayers? In particular, things to differentiate themselves from other factions (or even other duardin).

Given the nature of Slayers and the whole motif of Fyreslayers, I would think that they are a faction that will typically not utilize artillery and instead rush into battle. That being said, I think a focus on maybe one or two units of calvary, perhaps fyrelsayers riding on mini-salamanders or something, would be neat.

Also, maybe some more units that buff other units through runes (like prayers for priests) would help resolve the classic dawi problem with wizards. 

In general, like all AoS wave 1 factions, more of a selection is all I'd like. Fielding 3x30 blobs is not what i consider fun.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see some wizards. I know dwarf wizards are unconventional but Malign Sorcery specifically mentions Fyreslayer wizards at one point and the rune tunneling and the volcano ability of the Runesmiter and Runefather are basically magic anyways.

Beyond that, more unit variety would be nice. I'd like to see a unit of armored fyreslayers for the sake of painting and visual variety (not sure how to justify it lore wise other than something, something, runes). Female fyreslayers would be nice just to make them feel like a more complete people (personal pet peeve when factions only have male miniatures).

I like the idea of cavalry but with maybe chariots? They could be used to give the fyreslayers a quick moving unit that hits really hard but lacks staying power. I also love the idea of a mega-chariot pulled by magmadroths for the sheer coolness factor.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see more ways to dispell spells that fit with the narrative of dwarves hating wizards. The nighthaunt banshees have an ability that if they unbind a spell they get an extra attack. Something like that, representing how much we hate magic would be great 

 

A unit with a wounds characteristic of more than 1 and some cavalry would be great. But I'm not sure how to picture that 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Forrix said:

I'd like to see some wizards. I know dwarf wizards are unconventional but Malign Sorcery specifically mentions Fyreslayer wizards at one point and the rune tunneling and the volcano ability of the Runesmiter and Runefather are basically magic anyways.

Beyond that, more unit variety would be nice. I'd like to see a unit of armored fyreslayers for the sake of painting and visual variety (not sure how to justify it lore wise other than something, something, runes). Female fyreslayers would be nice just to make them feel like a more complete people (personal pet peeve when factions only have male miniatures).

I like the idea of cavalry but with maybe chariots? They could be used to give the fyreslayers a quick moving unit that hits really hard but lacks staying power. I also love the idea of a mega-chariot pulled by magmadroths for the sheer coolness factor.  

I love chariots. Some fire chariots would look amazing 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chariots and female fyreslayers would be awesome. GW lore on female dwarfs always alternated between good (they dont have beards, which was always an annoying trope IMO. Funny when Prachett did it, terrible everywhere else) and bad (only 1 in 10 dwarfs are women; aka this species should have died out literally the first time it fought a war). 

We know women take a pretty big role in Fyreslayer culture (the head of the Miners Fellowship in, i.e. one of the most important positions in a society that lives underground, was a woman in one of the short stories, and its not portrayed as abnormal) so having them as warriors would be cool. Plus barbarian dwarf warrior women with golden runes in their skin and gigantic ginger mohawks sounds so deliciously 80s.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every faction needs ladies, it’s a little on the nose but yeah RUNEMOTHER and RUNEDAUGHTER should BE THINGS.  Also I want ur-gold over charged exploding berserker dwarves and rune golems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×