Any Generals Handbook clarifications?

[Terry Pike]

1 hour ago, Arkiham said:

You can do what ever you want with your Terrain but the offical games workshop terrain allows movement around the trees, trees are not normally glued down for ease of storage, the concept of being allowed to remove the trees is a hangover from WHFB and should be forgotten. 

Can you show the ruling in the GHB, FAQ etc where it states trees should not be moved?

While it may sound like im trying to be a nob about it, I'm just pointing out why it isn't clear, as from what I can remember there is no reference/ruling on moving trees for convenience.

[Nico]

Can you give an artefact to a unit within your reinforcements?

[Arkiham]

12 minutes ago, Terry Pike said:

It can still be argued the other way though as the rules for the trees don't say you can't just move the trees out of the way during the game. You're right you can't pass through them, but there is nothing to say they aren't just placed to one side to make the movement through the wood more practical and to not damage models etc. I would still not put models in the round hole where the tree goes, but I would always move them for ease of gaming.

That's acceptable id say. as long as the models could have moved around the trees, and not the movement measured through the tree then yeah it's fine, 

[The Jabber Tzeentch]

45 minutes ago, Nico said:

Can you give an artefact to a unit within your reinforcements?

No. As reinforcements aren't in your list until they are summoned or brought on in some way. However things like the Thunderstrike brotherhood that do deployin to the game but not the table can have artefacts 

[The Jabber Tzeentch]

1 hour ago, teddet said:

Does the bone splittas ability that brings back units on a 6 require reinforcement points?  I would assume not

No it doesn't. However the unit cannot go over its original size. 

[Nico]

Quote

No. As reinforcements aren't in your list until they are summoned or brought on in some way. However things like the Thunderstrike brotherhood that do deployin to the game but not the table can have artefacts 

Having now read the book, I don't see where this comes from in the rules. All it says is that you must declare which hero has the artefact after picking your general. I don't see why you cannot pick a hero in your reinforcements. If they FAQ it the other way, then fine.

[mmimzie]

A few things:

As far as trees are concerned,  If you have two new players playing the game who have never war gamed before. They would reasonable assume you can't remove tress, The rules are pretty clear the trees can't be moved, and the only thoughts that i can be removed are from WHFB which expressly said they could be removed to allow rank and file through the trees. Imagine a make a building with removable walls, so does this mean i can remove a wall and put the a model where it was??? I played WHFB back in the day so i for a while thought and played the trees that way. However, i don't as it's really just a weird hold over that could confuse new people.

 

@Nico

Reinforments don't exist at all until summoned, so i'd say no. BUt i suppose there is no reason you couldn't put it where ever; so it's a fair enough guess. I'd just arguye the hero doesn't exist.

 

On the dublicating magic items. Another Possible WHFB/40k kinda question.  It is something that i could totally understand being the intent, but as rules are now you can indeed double up.

 

My question is how do zombies interact with reinforcements. After asking on the age of sigmar forums, and  asking as well i've gotten:

 

 

[Nico]

Quote

BUt i suppose there is no reason you couldn't put it where ever; so it's a fair enough guess. I'd just arguye the hero doesn't exist.

The risks would be (a) you're committed to summoning/bringing this guy on (otherwise you've lost the artefact), so you're giving information to your opponent; and (b) if the summoner/bringer dies or you bring something else on instead for the points, then you lose the artefact.

[RuneBrush]

2 minutes ago, mmimzie said:

Imagine a make a building with removable walls, so does this mean i can remove a wall and put the a model where it was???

No to removing a wall but I would say you could remove the roof to place your models into the building though   That said there are now rules for garrisoning so moving through buildings is now catered for I guess

[amysrevenge]

2 hours ago, Terry Pike said:

Can you show the ruling in the GHB, FAQ etc where it states trees should not be moved?

While it may sound like im trying to be a nob about it, I'm just pointing out why it isn't clear, as from what I can remember there is no reference/ruling on moving trees for convenience.

Not how it works mate.  Can you show me a ruling in the GHB, 4 pager, FAQ, etc. that states that trees, but not buildings or hills or rocks or other terrain, can be moved out of the way if it's convenient to you?

"Oops, this tree is in the way, can't quite fit my model into the space i want, let's just move it out of the way."

"Oops, the corner of this building is in the way, can't quite fit my model into the space i want, let's just move it out of the way."

What specific exception exists in the rules anywhere such that the former is acceptable but the latter isn't?  I mean, they very explicitly call out trees in particular as among the terrain objects that you can't move through.  What part of that makes a ruling that trees are the only objects you can move through seem correct?

 

Regardless - I support and advocate for a houserule that you can move individual trees off the forest base, but cannot occupy or move over the footprint where the trees normally stand on the base.  But it's definitely a houserule.

[The Jabber Tzeentch]

BUt i suppose there is no reason you couldn't put it where ever; so it's a fair enough guess. I'd just arguye the hero doesn't exist.

The risks would be (a) you're committed to summoning/bringing this guy on (otherwise you've lost the artefact), so you're giving information to your opponent; and (b) if the summoner/bringer dies or you bring something else on instead for the points, then you lose the artefact.

This is fine if you want to house rule it but it's certainly not within the rules. When you create your list you only have a pool of reinforcement points which may be used in battle, nowhere does it say to assign any units to these points and so artefacts cannot be assigned to any heroes you summon during the game.

Not how it works mate.  Can you show me a ruling in the GHB, 4 pager, FAQ, etc. that states that trees, but not buildings or hills or rocks or other terrain, can be moved out of the way if it's convenient to you?

"Oops, this tree is in the way, can't quite fit my model into the space i want, let's just move it out of the way."

"Oops, the corner of this building is in the way, can't quite fit my model into the space i want, let's just move it out of the way."

What specific exception exists in the rules anywhere such that the former is acceptable but the latter isn't?  I mean, they very explicitly call out trees in particular as among the terrain objects that you can't move through.  What part of that makes a ruling that trees are the only objects you can move through seem correct?

 

Regardless - I support and advocate for a houserule that you can move individual trees off the forest base, but cannot occupy or move over the footprint where the trees normally stand on the base.  But it's definitely a houserule.

These are my thoughts exactly. It's not acceptable with anything else so why is it acceptable with Wyldwoods? My trees are glued on to the base.

[Nico]

Quote

This is fine if you want to house rule it but it's certainly not within the rules. When you create your list you only have a pool of reinforcement points which may be used in battle, nowhere does it say to assign any units to these points and so artefacts cannot be assigned to any heroes you summon during the game.

I can follow this logic, I just don't think it's that 100% clear (because the wording about artefacts is so brief). Presumably this thread is being aimed at GW, so hopefully we'll get an answer in due course. I'm not keen on this as it's yet another (admittedly small) nerf to Death and Tzeentch.

[Terry Pike]

4 hours ago, amysrevenge said:

Not how it works mate.  Can you show me a ruling in the GHB, 4 pager, FAQ, etc. that states that trees, but not buildings or hills or rocks or other terrain, can be moved out of the way if it's convenient to you?

Can you show me in the terrain rules where it says the trees have to glued down and can't be moved during the game to allow for a more streamlined gaming experience?

As it is something that gets house ruled, its clearly not a rule provided in the GHB or 4 pages or rules. If it was it wouldn't need house ruling or clarifying with your opponent before the game. So yes mate that is how it works. If you have to house rule it, its not a clear ruling and/or something that can be played multiple different ways.

[Terry Pike]

4 hours ago, mmimzie said:

The rules are pretty clear the trees can't be moved

Could you provide the ruling please? It would be good to see where everyone is actually reading this

[APH]

If the rules don't say that you can, and neither do they say that you cannot, then it's between you and your opponent to decide. Everything else is strangers yelling at each other on the internet.

[amysrevenge]

19 minutes ago, Terry Pike said:

Can you show me in the terrain rules where it says the trees have to glued down and can't be moved during the game to allow for a more streamlined gaming experience?

As it is something that gets house ruled, its clearly not a rule provided in the GHB or 4 pages or rules. If it was it wouldn't need house ruling or clarifying with your opponent before the game. So yes mate that is how it works. If you have to house rule it, its not a clear ruling and/or something that can be played multiple different ways.

But, like I said, what about moving a statue or a building or a hill or any blocking terrain piece for an equally more streamlined experience?  I mean, it literally says in the actual rules that you can't move through a tree - it's an unsupportable stretch to add "since you can't move through a tree, you should just move the tree".  If you can't move through a tree, then it impedes your movement just like a statue or a rock or a watchtower would.

I don't like it, and so like I also said I support a house rule to let you move trees (but not stand on their footprints), but I'm not going to pretend that this isn't a house rule.  It's a deliberate change to the rules that I reckon improves gameplay.  Just like measuring to bases, which is clearly a house rule, and we adopt it to improve gameplay.

[amysrevenge]

25 minutes ago, Terry Pike said:

Could you provide the ruling please? It would be good to see where everyone is actually reading this

Here it is.

[Terry Pike]

1 minute ago, amysrevenge said:

But, like I said, what about moving a statue or a building or a hill or any blocking terrain piece for an equally more streamlined experience?  I mean, it literally says in the actual rules that you can't move through a tree

You don't need to move the building though, there are clear rules included for garrisoning a building in the dreadhold rules. It says you can put your models on the battlement if they will fit, you don't actually put them inside the plastic building.

In the same way that if you build the Citadel wood how its shown in the GHB you could only ever fit tiny models like skaven infantry in there. You move the trees for the purpose of actually being able to use a terrain piece. As I already said above though I wouldnt put my models in the hole where the tree goes as the rules state you can't pass through a tree.

[Terry Pike]

7 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:

Here it is.

It says you cant pass through a tree. It doesn't say you have to stick them down so that models can never physically fit inside a wood. They may aswell be impassable terrain if it built as its pictured. This is not what I asked for, I want to see the rules where it "clearly shows you can't move trees"

[mmimzie]

34 minutes ago, Terry Pike said:

Could you provide the ruling please? It would be good to see where everyone is actually reading this

The rules don't express every little thing you can't do but as @amysrevenge points out above. You see you can't move through a tree. 

Now the rules don't expressly state that you can't pick up a tree like a god and allow your models to momentarily occupy the space where it, and then later put the tree back again. But that doesn't mean you can do it.

 

Just as clearly the rules ddon't say, I that I can't give all my models a 2+ save because I'm blessing them with my loving gaze.  However, I doubt anyone would be cool with that.

 

Now if you wish to house rule that the trees can be moved, because the are merely simulating a massive forest. Then by all means go ahead. But don't pretend the rules or the way the game works Intend you to move the trees, just as much as my loving gaze does not conform a 2+ save to all my units. 

 

Edit: in reference to yourr Garrison of build comments do the rules do say you can climb in the trees if you'd like, but you'll need to spend your movement getting up and down  

[Terry Pike]

1 minute ago, mmimzie said:

The rules don't express every little thing you can't do but as @amysrevenge points out above. You see you can't move through a tree. 

Now the rules don't expressly state that you can't pick up a tree like a god and allow your models to momentarily occupy the space where it, and then later put the tree back again. But that doesn't mean you can do it.

 

Just as clearly the rules ddon't say, I that I can't give all my models a 2+ save because I'm blessing them with my loving gaze.  However, I doubt anyone would be cool with that.

 

Now if you wish to house rule that the trees can be moved, because the are merely simulating a massive forest. Then by all means go ahead. But don't pretend the rules or the way the game works Intend you to move the trees, just as much as my loving gaze does not conform a 2+ save to all my units. 

You have completely ignored everything I said and went off on some pointless rant. I'm saying that trees are moved so you can actually put models in the wood. NOT IN THE SPACE WHERE THE TREE ACTUALLY STANDS. Please read what I'm actually writing.

[Terry Pike]

But as its not a rule either way and is already house ruled at events because it is played multiple ways and has no actual ruling I'll just wait for GW to FAQ it and play it that way (or however its ruled at a tournament as I only play at them anyway).

[Brian Andrews]

I know that it was the norm to move the trees in WFB using rank and file troops but AoS is a skirmish game. I would have thought the skirmish nature was for just this kind of thing. By which I mean yes you can move foot troops through the woods but a Magmadroth (land bound dragon) would need to have a more considered route. A tree lord can spirit walk through woods although they can't blink from one side of the wood to the other. And then there is the issue of line of sight, which would mean trees would have to be put back at the exact facing they were in because a Dwarf Leader might be hiding behind it (AoS uses "true" line of sight) out of LOS of a skull cannon.

The only thing that would make me think otherwise is that when you place a wyldwood the bases have to be within 1" of each other. This would mean that you could effectively shove three them across the middle of the board and make it nigh on impossible for large bases to cross the woods. 

[amysrevenge]

I am right there with you Terry - I fully support that house rule, as it makes the game much more playable.  It is the way we've played it pretty much from the start.  Well, at the very first we were also stomping all over the stump holes, as a previous edition hangover.  But then we realized that was not how to play it in AoS, so we switched to avoiding the stump holes.

We also house ruled moving fences out of the way in the very early days, when a bunch of us were still using square bases in movement trays.  But since we're pretty much all round now it hasn't come up, since it's easy for all the models to be on whichever side of the fence without moving it.

[Terry Pike]

7 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:

I am right there with you Terry - I fully support that house rule, as it makes the game much more playable.  It is the way we've played it pretty much from the start.  Well, at the very first we were also stomping all over the stump holes, as a previous edition hangover.  But then we realized that was not how to play it in AoS, so we switched to avoiding the stump holes.

We also house ruled moving fences out of the way in the very early days, when a bunch of us were still using square bases in movement trays.  But since we're pretty much all round now it hasn't come up, since it's easy for all the models to be on whichever side of the fence without moving it.

This has been my point all along lol. It's discussed before the game / house ruled at an event to make the game more playable. Also did the same with stump holes for the first 6 months of events. My argument for the whole tree thing is its not clear in the rules so people stating "its clearly in the rules" are in fact wrong, if it was clear it wouldn't be discussed before / house ruled at the event lol