Soulblight Gravelords FAQ question collection

[Liquidsteel]

@Wordy9th @StokieRich 

On the subject of the mandatory first trait/artefact, I've had a few more discussions about this with others and I no longer think it's so clear cut.

The wording of the rule refers to whether the sub allegiance contains a singular trait or artefact, "a/an" rather than "any", as well as "that" rather than "those".

I'm leaning towards thinking that you can indeed take a generic trait or artefact again unless your tome specifically locks you in.

It's clearly poorly worded, but worth considering if it does come up in discussion.

 

[StokieRich]

I strongly disagree, at times there are rules that are poorly written and/or could be misinterpreted. This isn't one of them.

It is very clear to me, let's take them one at a time: 

1.) "If that allegiance abilities for a subfaction include a command trait (yes) and the general of your army has the keyword for that subfaction (yes), then that command trait must be the one you give to your general"

How do you possibly misinterpret that?!?!

2.) If the allegiance abilities for a subfaction include an artefact of power (yes) and any HEROES in your army have the keyword for that subfaction (yes), then that artefact of power must be the first artefact of power given to one of those HEROES.

On this one there is a TINY bit of wriggle room, but if you REALLY push it and try and say that it doesn't include those with lists because it says "that" rather than "one of those" (and I really think that is pushing it) then the rule still doesn't work at all because you have to apply the rule (you're a yes to both questions)

I really think this is wishful thinking and I would think it would be VERY poor form to try and game this and say that this would allow you to choose a generic artefact as your first.

Full disclosure here by the way: I have been running Amulet of Destiny in Soulblight but after reading this rule I am fully of the opinion that I should not be doing so and need to go with one of the Kastelai faction artefacts.

Edited July 19, 2021 by StokieRich

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

4 minutes ago, StokieRich said:

I strongly disagree, at times there are rules that are poorly written and/or could be misinterpreted. This isn't one of them.

It is very clear to me, let's take them one at a time: 

1.) "If that allegiance abilities for a subfaction include a command trait (yes) and the general of your army has the keyword for that subfaction (yes), then that command trait must be the one you give to your general"

How do you possibly misinterpret that?!?!

2.) If the allegiance abilities for a subfaction include an artefact of power (yes) and any HEROES in your army have the keyword for that subfaction (yes), then that artefact of power must be the first artefact of power given to one of those HEROES.

On this one there is a TINY bit of wriggle room, but if you REALLY push it and try and say that it doesn't include those with lists because it says "that" rather than "one of those" (and I really think that is pushing it) then the rule still doesn't work at all because you have to apply the rule (you're a yes to both questions)

I really think this is wishful thinking and I would think it would be VERY poor form to try and game this and say that this would allow you to choose a generic artefact as your first.

Might be a case of RAW vs RAI, but when I first read that rule I took it to be there to stop you from wriggling out of sub-allegiances that lock in your command trait and artefact. Like, for example, the Petrifex Elite subfaction locking you into the God Bone Armour artefact and Mighty Archeossian command trait. This is crucially different from how Soulblight subfactions work, because they don't lock you into any specific choice.

I think this reading is supported by the fact that if you can't take generic command traits as your first command trait, basically no army can make use of generic command traits at all. I think only that one Slaanesh subfaction where you get three command traits would be eligible, because Grand Alliance armies and other generic options for list building don't exist anymore.

I would not say that it's bad form to want to read this part of the allegiance abilites this way. It would certainly line up fairly closely with how things worked in AoS 2, where you could definitely take (for example) a realm artefact as your first artefact unless you were locked in by your subfaction.

To what extent we should take how things worked last edition into consideration is a matter of debate, of course. But there is reason to think that you can take a generic trait or artefact as your first in Soulblight beyond just wanting to game the system.

[StokieRich]

Hmm I see that point of view, and perhaps wouldn't protest so vigorously, however with not having that AOS 2.0 background (I only played a little of it) I would say this reads to be pretty conclusive to me that if you have sub factions artefacts and traits they want you to take one of those first.

[Liquidsteel]

Yeah basically what Neil has said, some books do lock you in with a certain Sub Faction.

The bit that you quoted is basically saying "if it has A trait/artefact then you must take THAT trait/artefact", which is probably referring to cases where you only have one choice.

As I said, I think it is ambiguous and can be read both ways, but the more I think about it the more I believe we are free to pick.

[Wordy9th]

What a god awful rules section enhancements is!

I can read this both ways. Isn't the "allegiance abilities" (where it talks about deathless minions / resurrecting units on a 5+) section separate from subfaction traits and artifacts? 

Also why is it specifically saying 'An' artifact and not 'any artifacts'? 

Edit: Also I saw it mentioned here that the Hunter's Snare artifact for Vyrkos would still allow Vlozds to count as 14 wounds, but a podcast I recently listened to said that it doesn't in light of the FAQ. What're we thinking?

 

 

Edited July 19, 2021 by Wordy9th

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

4 minutes ago, Wordy9th said:

What a god awful rules section enhancements is!

I can read this both ways. Isn't the "allegiance abilities" (where it talks about deathless minions / resurrecting units on a 5+) section separate from subfaction traits and artifacts? 

Also why is it specifically saying 'An' artifact and not 'any artifacts'? 

Edit: Also I saw it mentioned here that the Hunter's Snare artifact for Vyrkos would still allow Vlozds to count as 14 wounds, but a podcast I recently listened to said that it doesn't in light of the FAQ. What're we thinking?

 

 

Hunter's Snare definitely allows you to count for 14 models on a VLoZD. The FAQ just says that you don't get to count for even more models due to monsters counting for 5 by default according to the new rules. This is not even a case of RAW vs. RAI, as RAW unambiguously states that you get to count for as many models as your wounds characteristic is for the purpose of capturing, and that number is not further modified by being a monster or having 5+ wounds.

[Wordy9th]

I'd agree. I was surprised they ruled otherwise.

[deynon]

If you are interested, I realized a video about the FAQs of une soulblight gravelords

 

About the rules if the battletome I split in different themes:

 

 

[BaylorCorvette]

So I just realized this, but Neferata's "Twitlight's Allure" CA says it effects enemy units wholly within 12" however the damage table has a break down starting with 15" and going all the way to 3" IIRC the damage table was the old Neferata Twilight's Allure. Guess they forgot to update this?

[vlad3theimpaler]

On 7/30/2021 at 4:17 PM, BaylorCorvette said:

So I just realized this, but Neferata's "Twitlight's Allure" CA says it effects enemy units wholly within 12" however the damage table has a break down starting with 15" and going all the way to 3" IIRC the damage table was the old Neferata Twilight's Allure. Guess they forgot to update this?

Where are you seeing that?  I'm looking at the battletome right now and the damage table for Neferate only affects her movement and the attacks with abyssal talons.  

[Eldarain]

I think the app still has it. Claws are also named wrong too IIRC.

[Sception]

On 7/19/2021 at 3:49 AM, StokieRich said:

On this one there is a TINY bit of wriggle room, but if you REALLY push it and try and say that it doesn't include those with lists because it says "that" rather than "one of those" (and I really think that is pushing it) then the rule still doesn't work at all because you have to apply the rule (you're a yes to both questions)

A (one) artefact or command trait isn't the same as multiple artefacts or command traits.  This distinction isn't just pedantry, it's /necessary/ for the rule to be functional at all.  Take the example of a Vyrkos faction with a single generic hero/general in the list, and try to read the rule as applying:

Spoiler

If that allegiance abilities for a subfaction include a command trait (yes) and the general of your army has the keyword for that subfaction (yes), then that command trait must be the one you give to your general

The Vyrkos subfaction includes the command trait "Pack Alpha", and your general has the Vyrkos keyword, therefore your general must be given THAT specific command trait, ie Pack Alpha specifically.  But wait, the Vyrkos subfaction also includes the command trait "Spoor Tracker", therefore your general must be given THAT specific command trait, spoor tracker.  So which one do you give them?  They cannot have both, but they must be given each, and in fact must be given each individual command trait from the Vyrkos list, since each one is a command trait included in the subfaction allegiance abilities.  There is nothing in the text of the rule allowing you to pick and choose when confronted with a list of individually required options.

Each and every Vyrkos command trait is a command trait included in the Vyrkos allegiance abilities, therefore each and every one is individually mandated for your Vyrkos general.  No matter which Vyrkos command ability you give your vyrkos general, your list will still be illegal, because there will still be several other Vyrkos command abilities which by the core rule you are individually required to give your general that you did not take.

The same applies to artefacts.  If you don't distinguish between A (one) artefact and a list of multiple artefacts, then each and every subfaction artefact on the list is individually mandated as your obligatory first artefact.  No matter which artefact you take first, your list will still be illegal, because there are several other artefacts you were required to take first that you didn't.

...

You can say the core rule doesn't apply to subfactions with lists of command traits or artefacts beacuse 'several' isn't 'a', and yeah, that's the kind of tortured rules lawyer pedantry that should normally be frowned on, but the alternative here is that subfactions with lists of command traits or artefacts cannot be fielded at all - or rather can only be fielded if all of your heroes are unique, negating command trait and artefact choices altogether.

What you can't really go with - barring some errata - is an interpretation that subfactions with lists of traits/artefacts must choose their first trait/artefact from that list, because that's adding arbitrary lines of text to the rule that simply aren't there.  If that's the intended rule, than it absolutely requires errata adding that text, because "that command trait must be the one you give to your general" does not become "One of those command traits must be the one you give to your general" on its own.

 

Edited August 2, 2021 by Sception

[BaylorCorvette]

9 hours ago, vlad3theimpaler said:

Where are you seeing that?  I'm looking at the battletome right now and the damage table for Neferate only affects her movement and the attacks with abyssal talons.  

The app. But I know that won't be updated/changed since GW is coming out with a new one.