The Winter Rules Update

[yukishiro1]

I'm glad we don't. Priests, unlike wizards, have no real counterplay to them and being able to make super resilient and/or mobile stuff able to give out debuffs like curse or heals would not be very wise from a game balance perspective, even before getting into faction-specific prayers. I don't think Knight Draconis Priests or Vampire Lord on Zombie Dragon priests is really what the game is crying out for. 

If they wanted to make one that could only go on foot heroes of 7 wounds or less or something that'd probably be ok I guess. 

Edited December 31, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Kadeton]

3 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

If they wanted to make one that could only go on foot heroes of 7 wounds or less or something that'd probably be ok I guess. 

Separate artefact lists for Monster and non-Monster Heroes would be the distinction I'd prefer to see. The original Amulet and the Tome would both be totally fine on the non-Monster list, as would a Priest-keyword artefact.

[yukishiro1]

There are some weird cases of stuff without the monster keyword that are still as resilient as monster heroes - e.g. Eidolons - so I'd rather key it off wounds than the monster keyword. But in general I agree, it makes sense to have some artefacts that can only go on smaller, less resilient heroes. 

Edited December 31, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Kadeton]

Keying things off wounds is another of those "only makes sense outside of the game world" restrictions that really gets my goat - but yeah, I hear what you're saying. I'd just prefer if GW addressed those non-consistent edge cases individually, and had the core rules only referencing simple keywords. (For example, IMO Eidolons should be named characters, and should have the Monster keyword; either of those changes would address this case.)

[Joseph Mackay]

11 hours ago, NauticalSoup said:

But shouldn't arcane tome have been nerfed as well then? It also outshines nearly every army book relic in the game, and really only faced competition from the amulet.

And a 6+ FNP is garbage on nearly everything except possibly the fattest monsters, it could've stayed 5+ for squishy foot heroes.

I like Arcane Tome because it gives me access to wizards for my narratively themed armies that don’t normally have a Wizard (unless you break theme). Stuff like Warherd exclusively or Squig units exclusively, that can’t otherwise get magic.

Lets take Gloomspite Gits as an example - more specifically, units with the Squig keyword only (Loonboss on Giant Cave Squig, Loonboss on Mangler Squig, Squig Herd, Squig Hoppers, Boingrot Bounders, Mangler Squig). In the Moonclan spell lore (which the 2 Loonbosses have the keyword), there is the spell Squig Lure that lets squigs run and charge. If they nerf or remove the Tome, I would have to include a non-squig Wizard - like Skargrot The Loonking. Skargrot doesn’t have to be my general, but he loses half his warscroll if he is not. Making him my general, I lose Squig Hoppers as Battleline leaving only Squig Herd

[stratigo]

12 hours ago, KrispyXIV said:

I'd think that a competitive scenario would be more interested in setting up a level playing field than ensuring everyone's narrative and flavorful artefacts see play, but I suppose I'm more interested in seeing everyone has good artefact options than hoping my limited set will happen to be ok.  

Good Amulet sets up a more level playing field for competition.  Bad Amulet flatly does not. 

There are plenty of things that work differently based on the "carrier", Amulet could have been one of them. 

You don't actually seem to get why the amulet was a problem. 

 

It isn't that it was just too good and no tome artifacts could compete. It was because it WASN'T balanced for every army, the save gets MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH better the more wounds you have, because it is a save. A 5 wound hero with the amulet is nothing. A 36 wound Gargent is a nightmare. It was an unbalanced artifact that created winners and losers based on the quality of your hero monsters, and THAT is why it had to go away.

 

The problem with the amulet is that it did what you are decrying here, make winners and losers based on quirks of tomes.

[Doko]

Easy fix and not overnerfed as was the amulet:

 

5++ for 6 wounds or less models

6++ for 7 or more wounds.

Bum! Fixed the amulet problem and not destroyed as have been

[Skreech Verminking]

1 hour ago, Doko said:

Easy fix and not overnerfed as was the amulet:

 

5++ for 6 wounds or less models

6++ for 7 or more wounds.

Bum! Fixed the amulet problem and not destroyed as have been

I’ve got a much better idea.

2+ ward save.

The first time you fail it the ward save gets removed.

perfect for any smaller hero, and in average most monster models will loose it after having saved 6 wounds with the ward, of course we are talking about statistics and in a dice game it could mean nothing.

But it is chaotic and fun, and something every skaven/gitz player will love

[Brian Damage]

1 minute ago, Skreech Verminking said:

I’ve got a much better idea.

2+ ward save.

The first time you fail it the ward save gets removed.

perfect for any smaller hero, and in average most monster models will loose it after having saved 6 wounds with the ward, of course we are talking about statistics and in a dice game it could mean nothing.

But it is chaotic and fun, and something every skaven/gitz player will love

Gitz actually already have something similar with the Glowy Howzit for Dankhold Troggbosses (4+ ward, but he eats it if you ever roll a 1).

[Doko]

22 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

I’ve got a much better idea.

2+ ward save.

The first time you fail it the ward save gets removed.

perfect for any smaller hero, and in average most monster models will loose it after having saved 6 wounds with the ward, of course we are talking about statistics and in a dice game it could mean nothing.

But it is chaotic and fun, and something every skaven/gitz player will love

That isnt fun,40k have(or had? I havent played this edition) some veeeery similar with dark elfs archon that have a invulnerable save of 2 untill he faill one save and then loose it.

Some games he saved all the 2000 points firepower of my army because he had luck and never rolled a 1 and was broken and isnt fun.

[Skreech Verminking]

1 hour ago, Doko said:

That isnt fun,40k have(or had? I havent played this edition) some veeeery similar with dark elfs archon that have a invulnerable save of 2 untill he faill one save and then loose it.

Some games he saved all the 2000 points firepower of my army because he had luck and never rolled a 1 and was broken and isnt fun.

Exactly what I call true chaotic power.

I love randomness, and would do anything to see it coming back 

Edited December 31, 2021 by Skreech Verminking

[TerminusRex]

On 12/21/2021 at 8:55 AM, Jaskier said:

Will it solve the Legion of the First Prince problems? No, but this is a good step nonetheless. 

 

I’m out of the loop. What’s the problem? I just got Belakor.

[Dingding123]

58 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Exactly what I call true chaotic power.

I love randomness, and would do anything to see it coming back 

Random things happening >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Random prevention of things from ever happening

[Skreech Verminking]

17 minutes ago, Dingding123 said:

Random things happening >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Random prevention of things from ever happening

>>>>>>>>> prevention of certainty, eraser of a lame world, maker of equal endless possibilities, stirring the world towards madness, and that of true chaos!!!!!

 

[Joseph Mackay]

5 hours ago, Doko said:

That isnt fun,40k have(or had? I havent played this edition) some veeeery similar with dark elfs archon that have a invulnerable save of 2 untill he faill one save and then loose it.

Some games he saved all the 2000 points firepower of my army because he had luck and never rolled a 1 and was broken and isnt fun.

The big difference between Dark Eldar and anything like that in AoS, is that Dark Eldar are paying for that item

also, you can’t seriously think that item is too strong when the bearer is a T3 W5 5+sv HQ right?

[Doko]

Im not saying the item is broken,but isnt fun when the luck can do it so umbalanced.

A item with 5++ can be unfun if you roll all 5+ for saves,but that is so much harder than dont get a 1 lol

I havent played in this edition but for sure that item with archon was broken 3 years ago when i played with my taus,i usually needed spent as 400+ points to kill a hero of 50? For sure my friend tougth the same everytime that my comander with 4 cib couldnt do nothing vs his archon due to dont get 1 in dices never haha

[whispersofblood]

Shadowfield generator has been NPE for the better part of 20 years! It's a terrible example. 

[zilberfrid]

20 hours ago, Skreech Verminking said:

I’ve got a much better idea.

2+ ward save.

The first time you fail it the ward save gets removed.

perfect for any smaller hero, and in average most monster models will loose it after having saved 6 wounds with the ward, of course we are talking about statistics and in a dice game it could mean nothing.

But it is chaotic and fun, and something every skaven/gitz player will love

Why not the other way around? 2+ aftersave that is spent after the first time it prevents damage, or goes from 2+ to 4+ to 6+ to gone.

[NauticalSoup]

14 hours ago, whispersofblood said:

Shadowfield generator has been NPE for the better part of 20 years! It's a terrible example. 

Yeah it sucks. Insanely swingy. Iconic, but hardly something you want to start injecting into more games.

[Vastus]

Wait a balance update instead of letting broken things fester and leaving the weak to rot until kingdom come?

I know I've been gone for a few years, but this doesn't sound like the GW I know.

[NauticalSoup]

3 hours ago, Vastus said:

Wait a balance update instead of letting broken things fester and leaving the weak to rot until kingdom come?

I know I've been gone for a few years, but this doesn't sound like the GW I know.

Don't worry, most stuff is still broken and festering and the weak are by and large still rotting

[Skreech Verminking]

10 hours ago, Vastus said:

Wait a balance update instead of letting broken things fester and leaving the weak to rot until kingdom come?

I know I've been gone for a few years, but this doesn't sound like the GW I know.

Don’t worry.

the points update changed literally nothing.

Gw did their worst again.

Just like good ol’ times.

at least their small changes to certain core rules and core artifacts, were less disappointing.

[Skreech Verminking]

On 1/1/2022 at 10:54 PM, NauticalSoup said:

Yeah it sucks. Insanely swingy. Iconic, but hardly something you want to start injecting into more games.

There is only one word I can say to more random effects:

 

Yes, we-we want more, more, more randomness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Boingrot Bouncer]

12 hours ago, Vastus said:

Wait a balance update instead of letting broken things fester and leaving the weak to rot until kingdom come?

I know I've been gone for a few years, but this doesn't sound like the GW I know.

The weak armies are still weak (with perhaps the nighhaunt as an exception) and the top 6 armies are as strong as ever...for my gitz the pointchanges did nothing and for my LRL the increase in sentinels have a small but insignificant impact since I didn't do bowspam.

[Vastus]

 

3 hours ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Don’t worry.

the points update changed literally nothing.

Gw did their worst again.

Just like good ol’ times.

at least their small changes to certain core rules and core artifacts, were less disappointing.

Ah oh well, at least they tried to nudge things then. It looks more expansive than what I'm used to at least.