Stormcast Eternals 3.0 - There is no "a" in Vindictors

[Dogmantra]

Re: Cycle of the Storm & Blaze of Glory.

The phrase "does not count as having been slain" is retroactive because it is written in the past tense*. You cannot both not be slain and do something that requires you to be slain, so the rules are contradictory. 1.6.3 says that the last applied effect takes precedence when there are two contradictory effects, so either:

- you choose cycle of the storm first, count as not having been slain and therefore you can't explode afterwards

or

- you choose blaze of glory first, roll all those dice, then apply cycle of the storm which retroactively makes it so you weren't slain, which takes precedence due to being the last applied effect, so you have to go back and take back all those wounds you did because you weren't allowed to do them.

 

*(example: you miss a day of work due to illness, but your boss tells you "you don't count as having been sick", it retroactively removes your sickness from the record, the expectation would be that everyone acts as if you had never been sick that day)

[JackStreicher]

Well, that’s clearly not the intention ^^ so I won’t play it that way

[Requizen]

8 hours ago, CommissarRotke said:

Any thoughts on COS allies? I know Iceheart Phoenix with Lord was a big choice. Any foot wizards or troops we should keep our eye on?

I've been thinking about it and my current thought is that, unless you're really looking for theme, there's nothing we need that COS provides. The only thing they do slighly better is mass volume attacks as opposed to our elite quality attacks, but that's not particularly worth the points. 

The main thing I personally would want is bodies, in case you're light on Redeemers or are going Scions of the Storm. At which case, why not just Ally Skinks instead of Cities? They're cheaper than any Cities unit, can take a ranged weapon, and are faster. They don't have the 4+ of some of the Cities Battleline, but that's not really why you bring a blobby ally imo. 

Plus, I've got Skinks painted the same scheme as my Stardrake and Dracothian Guard, so it'll look nice to have the whole family on the table again.

[Marcvs]

1 hour ago, Requizen said:

I've been thinking about it and my current thought is that, unless you're really looking for theme, there's nothing we need that COS provides. The only thing they do slighly better is mass volume attacks as opposed to our elite quality attacks, but that's not particularly worth the points.

Further to this, it might just be more interesting to do the reverse and play your biggest SCE units in CoS and fill the rest.

You can easily have half your army (in terms of points) in two stormcast units and then add a CoS combo + chaff. Also, if you liked stormdrakes moving in the hero phase, how about them moving in the shooting phase as well?? 😅

[Erdemo86]

What do you guys think of this list? Dont warnt to go Full on Dragons but still be Competetive.

Yndrasta

Imperatant

Knight Draconis

 

2x 5 Vindictors

1x 4 Stormdrake Guard

1x 3 Anhilators with Shield

1x 3 Annhilators with Grandhammer

[JackStreicher]

28 minutes ago, Marcvs said:

Further to this, it might just be more interesting to do the reverse and play your biggest SCE units in CoS and fill the rest.

You can easily have half your army (in terms of points) in two stormcast units and then add a CoS combo + chaff. Also, if you liked stormdrakes moving in the hero phase, how about them moving in the shooting phase as well?? 😅

For Cities: add Yndrasta and Dragons. She can bring back a whole dragon right? (Don’t have her rules with me)

 

edit: she can‘t so going for a mau Paladin build with her seems like the way to go

Edited September 17, 2021 by JackStreicher

[JackStreicher]

Well:

Army Name: Yndrasta
Army Notes: Hallowed Knights
Army Faction: Stormcast Eternals
Army Type: Scions of the Storm
Subfaction: Hallowed Knights
Battlepack: Pitched Battles
Points Limit: 2000 pts

Units
    Yndrasta 
        Battlefield Role: Leader
        Points Cost: 320 pts
    Protectors 
        Battlefield Role: Other
        Points Cost: 225 pts
    Retributors 
        Battlefield Role: Other
        Points Cost: 235 pts
    Annihilators 
        Battlefield Role: Other
        Points Cost: 200 pts
    Annihilators with Meteoric Grandhammers 
        Battlefield Role: Other
        Points Cost: 240 pts
    Lord-Relictor 
        Battlefield Role: Leader
        Points Cost: 145 pts
    Knight-Incantor 
        Battlefield Role: Leader
        Points Cost: 125 pts
    Prosecutors with Stormcall Javelins 
        Battlefield Role: Other
        Points Cost: 115 pts
    Prosecutors with Stormcall Javelins 
        Battlefield Role: Other
        Points Cost: 115 pts
    Praetors 
        Battlefield Role: Other
        Points Cost: 165 pts
    Gryph-hounds 
        Battlefield Role: Other
        Points Cost: 110 pts

Total Points: 1995 pts
Invalid: Created with Warhammer Age of Sigmar: The App
 

lots of screens, a teleport prayer and raw hitting power with reviving Paladins.

I‘ll test this list some time though my SCE are painted as Celestial Vindicators

 

Exit: The new App is Bad

Edited September 17, 2021 by JackStreicher

[Turragor]

Hey, you know what makes me pretty content?

Previous to this tome, I couldn't think of a reason NOT to take Gotrek.

Now, even setting aside Dragons, I feel like Gotrek is still awesome but his points are a bit prohibitive with everything else I want to try including.

I think that's a good sign.

I mean, he may still end up popping up in all SC lists... only time will tell.

[Malakithe]

Im over here still wanting battleline thundercats...

[Marcvs]

11 minutes ago, Malakithe said:

Im over here still wanting battleline thundercats...

Yeah, evos battleline in celestial warbringers would have been nice

[Malakithe]

Anyone dreaming up a thundercats list? Or is everyone distracted by those flying lizards?

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

12 hours ago, Beliman said:

Is that true?

I understand that both have the same conditional "if a friendly model is slain...", but their timing seems to be incompatible. Blaze of Glory triggers "before removing that model" but Cycle of the Storms remove that trigger with "instead of removing that model from play...". 

 

My take on this is that the rules are actually compatible.

Both rules trigger when a model is slain. The "before removing that model" part of Blaze of Glory seems to me to just be a timing clarification: You do the whole mortal wound thing before removing the model. Makes sense, too, because otherwise you would not know what models are within 1" of your slain model. I don't think this rule needs to be read as requiring you to remove the model immediately afterwards.

Cycle of the Storm is a replacement effect. Also triggering on "when a model is slain", you replace removing the model with healing it and don't count it as slain any longer. If the "before removing that model" part in Blaze of Glory is indeed just about the timing of that ability, then there should not be a problem combining those two rules.

 

It would normally work like this:

Model slain -> remove model

Blaze of Glory inserts itself in between the two:

Model slain -> Blaze of Glory -> remove model

Cycle of the Storm:

Model slain -> Cycle of the Storm -> remove model heal model

And finally, combined:

Model slain -> Blaze of Glory -> Cycle of the Storm -> remove model heal model

[Skreech Verminking]

43 minutes ago, Malakithe said:

Anyone dreaming up a thundercats list? Or is everyone distracted by those flying lizards?

No, but I am distracted with rats

sorry mate🤗

Edited September 17, 2021 by Skreech Verminking

[Malakithe]

Just now, Skreech Verminking said:

No, but I am distracted with the tides of rats.

sorry mate

Well of course. Its in your name. Cant hold someone back from their true nature and all that.

[Beliman]

@Neil Arthur Hotep 

Maybe, I don't know. I'm not an english speaker, but to me, it seems that there are three major points with Blaze of Glory:

1. The conditional: If a friendly Stormcast Eternal model is slain...
   (The trigger that allows you to do the action, ability, whatever...)
2. The time when it happens: Before removing that model from play...
   (When you can do that action, ability, whatever...)
3. The effect: pick 1 enemy unit within 1"..

Same with Cycle of Storms:

1. The conditional: If a friendly Stormcast Eternal model is slain...
   (The trigger that allows you to do the action, ability,whatever...)
2. The time when it happens: Once per turn,... and instead of removing that model from play...
   (When you can do that action, ability, whatever...; in that case, it's when you remove models from play)
3. The effect: ...instead of removing that model from play you can heal 1 wound...

As @Reinholt explained a lot better than me (thx!), point (2) from Cycle of the Storms seems to not be compatible with point 2 of Blaze of Glory.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

1 minute ago, Beliman said:

@Neil Arthur Hotep 

Maybe, I don't know. I'm not an english speaker, but to me, it seems that there are three major points with Blaze of Glory:

1. The conditional: If a friendly Stormcast Eternal model is slain...
   (The trigger that allows you to do the action, ability, whatever...)
2. The time when it happens: Before removing that model from play...
   (When you can do that action, ability, whatever...)
3. The effect: pick 1 enemy unit within 1"..

Same with Cycle of Storms:

1. The conditional: If a friendly Stormcast Eternal model is slain...
   (The trigger that allows you to do the action, ability,whatever...)
2. The time when it happens: Once per turn,... and instead of removing that model from play...
   (When you can do that action, ability, whatever...; in that case, it's when you remove models from play)
3. The effect: ...instead of removing that model from play you can heal 1 wound...

As @Reinholt explained a lot better than me (thx!), point (2) from Cycle of the Storms seems to not be compatible with point 2 of Blaze of Glory.

I can certainly see the worry. This situation is not 100% clear because the timing of Blaze of Glory references "removing the model from play" and we don't really know how AoS rules handle situations where an event used to determine rule timing is replaced by another event.

Personally, I think there should not be a problem, because you resolve Blaze first, but the ability does not require you to remove the model at the end, just that it resolves before the model is removed. And then when you go to resolve Cycle, whatever Blaze says does not matter anymore because it's already resolved.

 

[KarrWolves]

Speaking of Cycle of the Storm, how does that interact with abilities that slain models directly ?

If we take a hero at 5/6W that is slain directly (without inflicting any wound), does he have 1, 5 or 6W after using Cycle of the Storm?

Sorry if that has already been explained in previous editions, but I've never faced the situation until yesterday's game VS Kruleboyz.

[macrake]

5 minutes ago, KarrWolves said:

Speaking of Cycle of the Storm, how does that interact with abilities that slain models directly ?

If we take a hero at 5/6W that is slain directly (without inflicting any wound), does he have 1, 5 or 6W after using Cycle of the Storm?

Sorry if that has already been explained in previous editions, but I've never faced the situation until yesterday's game VS Kruleboyz.

In that case the mode is healed 1 wound instead of being removed. So yes, cycle counters instant slay abilities like Archaons sword, Nagash hand of dust etc.

[Reinholt]

2 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

Personally, I think there should not be a problem, because you resolve Blaze first, but the ability does not require you to remove the model at the end, just that it resolves before the model is removed. And then when you go to resolve Cycle, whatever Blaze says does not matter anymore because it's already resolved.

 

So here is the key point: technically every moment in the game where the model is not yet removed is a moment BEFORE the model is removed. Can I just use Blaze like, you know, always? No. Because the slain condition is in there. Okay, so it's been slain and I haven't removed it from play yet. That's the exact moment where you can use Blaze.

Here's the problem: Cycle prevents it from being removed from play. So the unanswered implication in GW's statement (to which I am suggesting there is no answer, and why I think this is the perfect target for an FAQ) is that for Blaze to be triggered, it must be "before" a model is removed from play in a situation where the model is removed from play. If you cancel the removal of play of the model, is that:

1 - A legal interaction because you choose the order of resolution?

2 - An illegal interaction because the pre-condition for Blaze never occurs?

This is sort of like Redeploy & Unleash Hell where, given the looseness of language that GW uses, there's actually no precise way to tell with the English language what they have said here. Those are also a good example because it appears you could (viewing both capsules in isolation) use UH after Redeploy if there was no concept of previous action/trigger, but that's not how GW ruled it, which tells you they do think about meta-context. I can make a logically coherent argument for both 1 & 2 and while people may have strong opinions about it, those opinions rely on assumptions and intent. It is not as though they wrote:

"If a friendly Stormcast Eternals model is slain within 1" of an enemy model, before removing that model from play, pick 1 enemy unit within 1" of that model and roll a number of dice equal to the wounds characteristic of that slain model and after doing this, remove that model from play as part of resolving Blaze of Glory. It counts as having been slain."

That would have made it very clear that you can't then jam another effect in there because the model being removed is the end of resolving Blaze. Likewise, they could have written the reverse (expressly saying this effect resolves and then other effects may resolve before the model is removed from play) to make clear they meant you could Cycle after Blaze. Instead, they have done neither.

My prediction is we need an FAQ, because I honestly couldn't tell you which one they intended.

Edited September 17, 2021 by Reinholt

[PJetski]

Effects occur one at a time, not simultaneously. You don't apply effects retroactively; that doesn't make any sense. Resolve one effect then move on to the next.

Edited September 17, 2021 by PJetski

[Reinholt]

9 minutes ago, PJetski said:

Effects occur one at a time, not simultaneously. You don't apply effects retroactively; that doesn't make any sense. Resolve one effect then move on to the next.

Please explain the Redeploy / Unleash Hell FAQ then.

Regardless of our opinion here, it's clear GW does have some concept of the trigger needing to not have occurred / been interrupted already in at least one other spot. If they had ruled that the other way I would agree with you here, but they've already contradicted how their watertight rules supposedly work, so what you stated is obviously not always true as there is an existing counterexample in the core rulebook FAQ!

[Marcvs]

15 minutes ago, Reinholt said:

2 - An illegal interaction because the pre-condition for Blaze never occurs?
 

The pre-condition for blaze is that a model is slain. That clearly occurred, otherwise Cycle of the storm wouldn't trigger either.

[PJetski]

18 minutes ago, Reinholt said:

Please explain the Redeploy / Unleash Hell FAQ then.

Regardless of our opinion here, it's clear GW does have some concept of the trigger needing to not have occurred / been interrupted already in at least one other spot. If they had ruled that the other way I would agree with you here, but they've already contradicted how their watertight rules supposedly work, so what you stated is obviously not always true as there is an existing counterexample in the core rulebook FAQ!

That's not an applicable case. This is not a situation of contradictory effects; this is an issue of timing.

The argument hinges on what actually "triggers" the abilities. Is it:

• A) "when the model is slain"; or
• B) "when you remove the model"

If it's A -> Both effects apply at the same time, which means they fall under 1.6.2 Simultaneous Effects. As per 1.6.2, effects are resolved one at a time. As per 1.6.2, the player controlling both Blaze and Cycle effects can apply them in the order they desire.  You can choose to resolve Blaze first, then resolve Cycle.

If you choose to resolve Cycle first it would stop Blaze from activating because it replaces the slain trigger... but why would you do this?

If it's B -> Blaze says "before you remove the model" and Cycle activates when you remove the model so the timing is strictly defined. The effects are not simultaneous; Blaze must be applied first and must be fully resolved before you can activate Cycle. 

In both cases you can Die > Blaze > Cycle > Die > Blaze

These are not "contradictory effects" because Blaze must be fully resolved by the time you activate Cycle. Blaze does not state the model must be removed for the mortal wounds to happen, or that it can only activate once per phase.  Cycle does not retroactively stop Blaze from activating. There is nothing in the rules (or common sense) to suggest this is how the game functions. 

Edited September 17, 2021 by PJetski

[Starfyre]

7 hours ago, Requizen said:

I've been thinking about it and my current thought is that, unless you're really looking for theme, there's nothing we need that COS provides. The only thing they do slighly better is mass volume attacks as opposed to our elite quality attacks, but that's not particularly worth the points. 

The main thing I personally would want is bodies, in case you're light on Redeemers or are going Scions of the Storm. At which case, why not just Ally Skinks instead of Cities? They're cheaper than any Cities unit, can take a ranged weapon, and are faster. They don't have the 4+ of some of the Cities Battleline, but that's not really why you bring a blobby ally imo. 

Plus, I've got Skinks painted the same scheme as my Stardrake and Dracothian Guard, so it'll look nice to have the whole family on the table again.

I’ve always liked Phoenix guard in my stormcast army, for the 4+ ward and provide bodies which is something we lacked (though stormkeep rules help with that). I even converted mine to have sce helmets (female ones because the male ones are massive on their slight elves frames) and replaced the spear tips with vanguard sword blades to give myself ‘baby stormcast’ as a mate put it.

Super resilient and helps stop my mate’s rampaging terrorghiest and flayers.

[CommissarRotke]

15 hours ago, Dogmantra said:

*(example: you miss a day of work due to illness, but your boss tells you "you don't count as having been sick", it retroactively removes your sickness from the record, the expectation would be that everyone acts as if you had never been sick that day)

this isn't true though, it would be considered rude to ignore if a coworker had been sick--and most people will ask you how you're feeling the next time they see you. so it's the same concept: yea you can blow up, but then the arcanum tethers you back to the realm you died in