Jump to content

5kaven5lave
 Share

Recommended Posts

The wording with regard to Clan battleline is as follows. A unit like Skryre Acolytes is "Battleline in Skaventide army if general is MASTERCLAN or CLANS SKRYRE, and all other units are CLAN SKRYRE".

To me, that reads like 100% of your army must be Skryre, for example. My local store manager is in disbelief that the rule would be written like that and seems convinced it does not apply to allies. We will see, I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I think someone goofed as well. It seems really odd for them to make it so that pure clans can't have any allies at all. Esp for anyone running a Pestilens army and wanting some Nurgle. Whilst I'm all for GW supporting pure armies and they've done really well with AoS in avoiding the soup issues of 40K (granted that's mostly just marines); I'd still expect them to be able to take some allies from another clan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it not the case with most armies though? Like Putrid Blightkings are battleline in a pure Nurgle army and to be a Nurgle army all units must have the keyword. 

Then allies are a seperate thing, if nothing else I feel that’s the way it’s intended but it’s certainly not written in a clear enough manner

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Zuriaxis said:

We'll have to wait a few weeks for the inevitable FAQ, which for some reason is becoming increasingly common.

By increasingly you mean every release.

And honestly its BETTER than the past when the FAQ came years later (if it came at all). Heck I recall more than once the FAQ arrived just before GW released a new rules edition! So you finally got the FAQ and updates you were after for a rules system that was being dumped in favour of a a new one! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kirjava13 said:

It winds me up a bit that these things slip through while the writers are on their podcast talking about how in-depth their rules writing is and how much peer review there supposedly is. I know everyone involved is only man-things, just does nothing to dispel any cynicism.

Honestly a lot of the slipups and style of writing are I think the result of the issue that many of their rules writers play "as intended" without realising it; with things not being caught because they keep things so closed shop that review happens by too isolated a team. Sisters of Battle might be interesting for GW as its their first time attempting anything like an open rules beta. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Overread said:

Honestly I think someone goofed as well. It seems really odd for them to make it so that pure clans can't have any allies at all. Esp for anyone running a Pestilens army and wanting some Nurgle. Whilst I'm all for GW supporting pure armies and they've done really well with AoS in avoiding the soup issues of 40K (granted that's mostly just marines); I'd still expect them to be able to take some allies from another clan. 

I think we need to be realistic here, there’s very little chance they’ll faq such a massive rule that defines the army. It’s not a misprint and there’s no way they didn’t understand the implications of such specific wording. I think the rule is obtuse but it must be the result of playtesting and there’s something they want to avoid. 

Probably Skryre with Clanrats I guess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kirjava13 said:

It winds me up a bit that these things slip through while the writers are on their podcast talking about how in-depth their rules writing is and how much peer review there supposedly is. I know everyone involved is only man-things, just does nothing to dispel any cynicism.

Honestly, if they can just crank out decent quality Battletomes for all the other factions at a good rate then I can stand even a dozen typos. It's not ideal but at this point in time I'd rather have something on par with modern AoS with mistakes, than wait another 3 years for something better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Knight Scáthach of Fimm said:

Honestly, if they can just crank out decent quality Battletomes for all the other factions at a good rate then I can stand even a dozen typos. It's not ideal but at this point in time I'd rather have something on par with modern AoS with mistakes, than wait another 3 years for something better.

Yeah, me too in truth. It's just an irritation, but I would rather have the book than not.

Sky Skaven Spotted! Clan Skryre has definitely got flying machines of their own. Arch-Warlock Steelklaw has his own skyfleet: "Built around cannibalised Kharadron craft and the fevered designs that have poured from Steelklaw's mind, dozens of armoured dirigibles, lightning-ships, warpfire barges and klawbombers take to the sky." The best bit? It's called "The Much-Great Sky-Kill Air Armada" 😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kirjava13 said:

It winds me up a bit that these things slip through while the writers are on their podcast talking about how in-depth their rules writing is and how much peer review there supposedly is. I know everyone involved is only man-things, just does nothing to dispel any cynicism.

 

I reckon the rules are written exactly as intended. Encourages more pure allegiances, which is better imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...