AoS 3 New Rules Discussion

[PJetski]

Has anyone else pointed out the fact that you can't use Fly High if you have an enemy within 3" with the new rules?

[stratigo]

The wording also says clearly that it can retreat and disengage under fly high.

 

Currently the interpretation of fly high is that it now has the same limits as disengage (can't get away from flyers). 

[Fyrm]

Have we had confirmation as to whether or not we can include allies in core battalions? I can’t see anything saying we can’t in the core rules, but I could easily see that being something tucked away somewhere I missed. 

[yukishiro1]

Yeah that will be FAQ'd for sure,  it was written before AOS moved to the clear definitions of what a normal move is vs a retreat. The whole point of the ability is to let the ships get away from people, even when in melee. 

[PJetski]

23 minutes ago, stratigo said:

The wording also says clearly that it can retreat and disengage under fly high.

 

Currently the interpretation of fly high is that it now has the same limits as disengage (can't get away from flyers). 

That text "it can retreat" doesn't mean anything any more because you can always retreat if you are within 3". It doesn't change the fact that you can't be eligible to use Fly High if you are not able to make a normal move, since you use Fly High in lieu of making a normal move.

It definitely needs an errata if they want it to keep the same functionality it had before.

[Battlefury]

Just read the rules today and I really think they are often very missleading.

1. Apparently a shooting unit can shoot an enemy, if 1 single model is in range and can see the enemy, right?
2. Those generic abilities to wait and shoot and that retreat one ( forgot the name ) can be use together, as long as you got enough command points, can't you?
3. It seems, that a terrain piece, that has a diameter of 1", but is 19" high is concidered very large terrain, since they didn't clarify wich dimension is meant by measuring the longest available side.

Edited June 18, 2021 by Battlefury

[yukishiro1]

No, shooting is done model by model within the unit. You have to check range for each one.

One thing that is slightly confusing is the wording on having to measure to the closest model, but also that models with minimum ranged characteristics can fire unless the entire target unit is within the minimum distance. These two bits seem to contradict one another - if your catapult has a min 6" range and the enemy unit's closest model is 4" away but the furthest is 12", can you shoot because some models are outside 6", or can you not shoot because you have to measure to the closest visible model, and that one is within the minimum range? I think they are trying to say you can fire in those circumstances, but it's not clearly worded. 

[Acrozatarim]

22 minutes ago, Battlefury said:

Just read the rules today and I really think they are often very missleading.

2. Those generic abilities to wait and shoot and that retreat one ( forgot the name ) can be use together, as long as you got enough command points, can't you?

If I remember correctly, Redeploy explicitly calls out that you can't shoot later in the same turn that you use it. Redeploy happens in the movement phase, Unleash Hell in the charge phase, so you can't use them together.

[Battlefury]

Bringing my non MSU units of 5 or more models into cover will be...difficult.

[stratigo]

46 minutes ago, PJetski said:

That text "it can retreat" doesn't mean anything any more because you can always retreat if you are within 3". It doesn't change the fact that you can't be eligible to use Fly High if you are not able to make a normal move, since you use Fly High in lieu of making a normal move.

It definitely needs an errata if they want it to keep the same functionality it had before.

Or it means that fly high can retreat and disengage. 

[Beliman]

51 minutes ago, stratigo said:

Or it means that fly high can retreat and disengage. 

That's how it should be. But the whole description of Fly High is a bit crazy:

• Fly High is a Set-up, it doesn't care about Retreat (and disengage is a modification of retreat) or Run. It only cares about a Normal Move (Instead of making a normal move with this model....yadda yadda). We had a lot of FAQs to make it clear that it's a Set-up and how they function.
• A Retreat is not a Normal Move anymore but Disengage is still based on a Retreat (This model and any models in its garrison can still shoot if this model retreats in the same turn, ... yadda yadda).

Thanks to the first point, we could use Fly High within 3" (we don't cared about disengage nor retreat, we just needed to have a Normal Move) in AoS 2.0 and still shoot (because it was never a retreat/disengae or anything like that).

In 3.0, if Fly High is still a Set-up, it still ignores Retreat/Disengage, and still needs a Normal Move to activate. The description that we can Retreat or Disengage is nice and all, but it doesn't provide new rules for Fly High unless it's treated as a Move and not as a Set-up.

I still think that we need a FAQ for Fly High. It was strange to have Retreat/Disengage in the description for 2.0 and it become  weirder in 3.0. 

Edited June 18, 2021 by Beliman

[stratigo]

The wording of fly high has always been a problem

[Havelocke]

3 hours ago, PJetski said:

Has anyone else pointed out the fact that you can't use Fly High if you have an enemy within 3" with the new rules?

This same wording is used in a bunch of Sylvaneth teleport effects. I'm hoping they FAQ this, since not teleporting out of combat kinda matters.

[Lior'Lec]

Had a question on the new reinforcement rules: If a double reinforced battleline unit counts as two units for army composition... where do we find the limit on number of reinforced units? Have looked again but just don’t see it mentioned anywhere, maybe I’m going blind. 

[Marcvs]

2 hours ago, Lior'Lec said:

Had a question on the new reinforcement rules: If a double reinforced battleline unit counts as two units for army composition... where do we find the limit on number of reinforced units? Have looked again but just don’t see it mentioned anywhere, maybe I’m going blind. 

The limits for reinforced unit are in the Matched play section so either the full core book or the new GHB I believe, not the free pdf

[Tobjen99]

If i understand 3. edt correctly we dont have all the realms in "Realms of battle" anymore, Ghur seams like to only availible realm. What abour realm artifacts and realm spels? 

Or du we still use the realm of battle rules from 2. edt and magic and artifacts from malign sorcery?

[whispersofblood]

8 minutes ago, Tobjen99 said:

If i understand 3. edt correctly we dont have all the realms in "Realms of battle" anymore, Ghur seams like to only availible realm. What abour realm artifacts and realm spels? 

Or du we still use the realm of battle rules from 2. edt and magic and artifacts from malign sorcery?

The only Realm available at the moment is Ghur, I'm sure GW has plans for the rest to appear in different formats or supplements for Aos3. But at the moment it would appear in the GHB and matched play battlepack there isn't a multiplicity of artefacts and spells from the realms. As per usual though you and your opponent can agree to use those older books as source material in your games for spells or artefacts, but it does invalidate or compromise your experience as useful for other gamers without heavily qualifying. 

[stratigo]

24 minutes ago, whispersofblood said:

The only Realm available at the moment is Ghur, I'm sure GW has plans for the rest to appear in different formats or supplements for Aos3. But at the moment it would appear in the GHB and matched play battlepack there isn't a multiplicity of artefacts and spells from the realms. As per usual though you and your opponent can agree to use those older books as source material in your games for spells or artefacts, but it does invalidate or compromise your experience as useful for other gamers without heavily qualifying. 

I would not be surprised for GW to start doing a realm every six months to coincide with big FAQ and GHB releases.

[Simson]

Sorry if this has been discussed already. How would command abilities that have a army wide effect such as Nagash's Supreme Lord of the Undead ability work exactly? As you don't target a specific unit, are you then able to choose another ability such as Ralpy and target a unit? Or are they now all ineligible?

[CaptainSoup]

Goonhammer has been posting some articles worth noting, one about coherency rules and how it's not as awful as you think and about Matched play setup and missions and what to expect from them (from the CRB anyway). It's worth a read.

https://www.goonhammer.com/ruleshammer-age-of-sigmar-3-0-coherency-rules/

https://www.goonhammer.com/age-of-sigmar-3-0-core-book-matched-play-battleplans/

Some key takeaways I've noticed is how for 25mm models you can technically still conga line as long and everyone is physically touching, and that there are different ways to legally and strategically arrange your models outside of rank and file.

As for the matched play article, a lot of the ways you gain VP revolve around attacking heroes and units while primary scoring revolves around holding objectives. It also seems that mystical terrain isn't a thing in matched play (at least from the CRB) so that's one less thing to worry about during a game.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

10 minutes ago, CaptainSoup said:

As for the matched play article, a lot of the ways you gain VP revolve around attacking heroes and units while primary scoring revolves around holding objectives. It also seems that mystical terrain isn't a thing in matched play (at least from the CRB) so that's one less thing to worry about during a game.

This is something I have been thinking about. In my opinion, the new scoring system might be a realy boon to elite armies. Before, all elite armies without capturing shennenigans had a hard time winning the game, just because capturing and holding objectives was the only way to win. Now, it seems like nearly half the points of any given game will be available regardless of capturing. You could lose to your opponent in the objective game, but really turn the game around by playing to achieve your grand strategy and deny your opponent theirs, as well as outscoring them on battle tactics.

I think between this, the new monster abilities and the fact that monsters now capture for 5, monster mash and elite lists are look really competitive. It's probably no longer the case that a horde list has a huge advantage over an elite list simply in virtue of bringing a lot more bodies.

[RuneBrush]

On 6/19/2021 at 8:29 PM, Simson said:

Sorry if this has been discussed already. How would command abilities that have a army wide effect such as Nagash's Supreme Lord of the Undead ability work exactly? As you don't target a specific unit, are you then able to choose another ability such as Ralpy and target a unit? Or are they now all ineligible?

As I read it, aura command abilities aren't "received" by a unit, so a unit could benefit from it and also receive a Rally.  Nagash will still count as issuing a Command Ability though, so wouldn't be able to issue the Rally (as they're both Hero phase Command Abilities).  I would imagine this will be clarified in an FAQ though.

[Sleboda]

6 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

the new monster abilities and the fact that monsters now capture for 5, monster mash and elite lists are look really competitive. It's probably no longer the case that a horde list has a huge advantage over an elite list simply in virtue of bringing a lot more bodies.

That's a shame, really. I'm not saying the game won't be fun played this way, but I remember the days of Herohammer, where the army itself really didn't matter in many cases, only the general, a few monsters, and a cannon.

This feels like a move back toward "armies" where there isn't an army, just a collection of individuals with great power. Sons of Behemat for all in other words. 

I suppose this really just puts "this is not a wargame anymore!!!" in neon on the billboard. And that's ok. There are other games where armies fight armies, it just may be that AoS has decided to give up the pretense and embrace the ease of access of only needing 20 models to play.

Makes me wonder what place Warcry will have going forward, though. There's really no need for GW to maintain two low model count skirmish games.

Ah well. I'll have fun regardless!

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

2 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

That's a shame, really. I'm not saying the game won't be fun played this way, but I remember the days of Herohammer, where the army itself really didn't matter in many cases, only the general, a few monsters, and a cannon.

This feels like a move back toward "armies" where there isn't an army, just a collection of individuals with great power. Sons of Behemat for all in other words. 

I suppose this really just puts "this is not a wargame anymore!!!" in neon on the billboard. And that's ok. There are other games where armies fight armies, it just may be that AoS has decided to give up the pretense and embrace the ease of access of only needing 20 models to play.

Makes me wonder what place Warcry will have going forward, though. There's really no need for GW to maintain two low model count skirmish games.

Ah well. I'll have fun regardless!

One of the things I like about AoS is the large variety in what an army can be. I like that there is both the option of running 100+ little guys and 4 big guys in the same game. To me, that really enhances the fantasy setting of the game, where a lot of things that would not be happening in the real world can happen.

Previously, the rules allowed you to build an elite or super-elite army, but it was not actually good. I think the new edition just shifts the balance a little bit towards all styles of armies being workable. There is still a lot of strength in big blocks of little guys. It's just that it's no longer an insurmountable obstacle for elite lists.

[Beliman]

6 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

That's a shame, really. I'm not saying the game won't be fun played this way, but I remember the days of Herohammer, where the army itself really didn't matter in many cases, only the general, a few monsters, and a cannon.

This feels like a move back toward "armies" where there isn't an army, just a collection of individuals with great power. Sons of Behemat for all in other words. 

I suppose this really just puts "this is not a wargame anymore!!!" in neon on the billboard. And that's ok. There are other games where armies fight armies, it just may be that AoS has decided to give up the pretense and embrace the ease of access of only needing 20 models to play.

Makes me wonder what place Warcry will have going forward, though. There's really no need for GW to maintain two low model count skirmish games.

Ah well. I'll have fun regardless!

I think that's an oversimplification. Before, we had 80% of armies using Big Blocks of infantry models to do all the work: from heavy lifting to capture objectives. Only a few monsters were relevant for the game and elite armies had a hard time to play games.

In this new edition, It seems that some monsters (not all btw...) are going to have some tools that will make them a bit stronger and some elite armies are going to have a push to compete with others.

How good this is going to be... time will tell.