Woods, how many to summon?

[thediceabide]

Hey guys, I'm just looking at the new GHB entry for Sylvaneth Wyldwoods and I'm wondering if the min/max unit size of 1 means a single citadel wood. Before people were summoning "two or more" though now with the unit size of 1/1, should they now be placing a single tree base?

[Choombatta]

@Arkiham, if by old information, you mean what I have printed in front of me, than yes. I now have 3 different rules in print form about Sylvaneth Wyldwoods. Hard to criticize someone when the "facts" continuously change.

It still begs my original question though, no matter the description.......why add a min/max model count if it does not indeed have a model count?

[thediceabide]

20 minutes ago, Arkiham said:

So, the conclusion and confusion is people are basing their comments off old information without doing some fact checking to make sure it's correct ?

The confusion seems to mostly be around people denying that a Citadel Wood is a model.

[Craptrain]

2 hours ago, thediceabide said:

The confusion seems to mostly be around people denying that a Citadel Wood is a model.

No, those people are in the right, as has been explained many many times.

[Arkiham]

On 15/11/2016 at 5:21 PM, thediceabide said:

The General's Handbook states that you cannot raise a unit beyond it's starting number using any spell or ability (under Reinforcement Points on p.108). Under Picking Your Army (p.107) it says that units can be taken in multiples of their minimum unit-size up to their maximum size. In Reinforcement Points, it says you pay the points from your pool when you summon the unit. You couldn't pay for a unit larger than the maximum-size on it's GHB entry without making up some rules, or by ignoring how you calculate points for a unit. Nagash doubles the number he summons, so at best he could summon a single unit of 40 Skeletons, so I'm not sure where you get 80 from, and when summoning Heroes, he summons 2, but not a unit of 2. There is actually no situation (that I can find) where you would create a unit in the game of more models than it's min/max entry in the GHB, with the exception of people arguing to summon more than 1 Citadel Woods in their Sylvaneth Wyldwood.

Basically, if your goal is to try to not break any rules, you won't be summoning any units with more models in them than the maximum restriction on their GHB entry. ;-)

But the sylvaneth Wyldwood is made up of 1-3 citadel woods. so it's not breaking rules

You're summoning a sylvaneth Wyldwood , not a citadel wood 

[thediceabide]

6 hours ago, Craptrain said:

No, those people are in the right, as has been explained many many times.

Then you cannot place the wood at all because you never meet the minimum model count required.

Simply reiterating a false argument doesn't make it right, regardless of what politics has shown us.

 

1 hour ago, Arkiham said:

But the sylvaneth Wyldwood is made up of 1-3 citadel woods. so it's not breaking rules

You're summoning a sylvaneth Wyldwood , not a citadel wood 

Correct, but the GHB puts a Min/Max of 1 model (read the GHB, the limits are explicitly on models in the unit, not number of units).

Either the Citadel Wood is a model and capped at 1, or it isn't a model and cannot meet the minimum requirement of 1 model and thus cannot be taken. Take your pick.

[BaldoBeardo]

*not a unit*

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Bowlzee]

4 hours ago, thediceabide said:

Correct, but the GHB puts a Min/Max of 1 model (read the GHB, the limits are explicitly on models in the unit, not number of units).

Either the Citadel Wood is a model and capped at 1, or it isn't a model and cannot meet the minimum requirement of 1 model and thus cannot be taken. Take your pick.

I've posted before, it's min/max "Sylvaneth Wyldwood" You can only summon 1 at a time. 1 Sylvaneth Wyldwood consists of 1-3 citadel woods.  

It's not rocket science. 

If the Profile said Citadel Wood Min/Max 1 then I would agree with you. You have to remember this is a Scenery Scroll, not a unit scroll.

[Arkiham]

I think this discussion is done,  the amount of cycles this has been in would impress a spirograph.

The op has made his stance, the counterargument has been made and his opinion is unchanged while others have changed theirs.

Discussing it further is a pointless endeavor until games workshop make a faq.

[Choombatta]

I will say I am still in agreement with @thediceabide.

You either ignore the min/max value, or you have to say Sylvaneth Wyldwood is a "unit".

It has to be one or the other. The wording of "Min/Max" does not allow any room for "guessing" here.

Otherwise, just treat "scenery" like Battalions, give it a point value, but do not give it a min/max.

[BaldoBeardo]

Except if it's not a unit, it can't really be subject to any rules statements containing the word 'unit'...

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Choombatta]

Which means you must ignore the Min/Max value.

Why add something just in the past 2 weeks that players are expected to ignore?

[thediceabide]

3 hours ago, Bowlzee said:

I've posted before, it's min/max "Sylvaneth Wyldwood" You can only summon 1 at a time. 1 Sylvaneth Wyldwood consists of 1-3 citadel woods.  

It's not rocket science. 

If the Profile said Citadel Wood Min/Max 1 then I would agree with you. You have to remember this is a Scenery Scroll, not a unit scroll.

If you think it's Min/Max one Sylvaneth Wyldwood, then you clearly haven't read the section of the GHB that explains how min/max size works. I really suggest you read the rules before you insist that it's so simple. 

Min/max size explicitly is about the number of MODELS allowed in a unit. It would have no effect on the number of "Sylvaneth Wyldwoods" as there is no such model by that name. So either the Citadel Wood is a model, or it isn't. If it isn't, you cannot reach the minimum number of models required. If it is, then you're limited to one.

Since Min/Max explicitly says it's in reference to the number of models, I'm not sure why you keep thinking it's relevant to the number of "Sylvaneth Wyldwoods," when there is no such model.

[Arkiham]

Your argument of no such model is rubbish.

By your argument there is many models that are no longer usable as that model no longer exists, here is just a few 

Wight king with black axe.

Chaos lord of slaanesh 

Curseling Lord of Tzeentch 

Sarus sunblood 

Spirit of durthu 

These are all reused warscrolls no longer valid, according to you, as there is no model for them.

[thediceabide]

45 minutes ago, Arkiham said:

Your argument of no such model is rubbish.

By your argument there is many models that are no longer usable as that model no longer exists, here is just a few 

Wight king with black axe.

Chaos lord of slaanesh 

Curseling Lord of Tzeentch 

Sarus sunblood 

Spirit of durthu 

These are all reused warscrolls no longer valid, according to you, as there is no model for them.

Woah random tangent, what are you even talking about? All of those models have warscrolls... you can buy them from the GW store and on their warscrolls even show you a picture of what model to use. Oh hey, there's a thought, go look at the Wyldwood and tell me what model you see in the picture.

[Craptrain]

9 hours ago, thediceabide said:

Then you cannot place the wood at all because you never meet the minimum model count required.

Simply reiterating a false argument doesn't make it right, regardless of what politics has shown us.

 

Your argument is nonsensical and illogical.  You can very clearly meet the minimum by placing 1 Sylvaneth Wyldwood which consists of up to 3 Citadel Woods.  You're holding on to the notion that Citadel Woods are models when Games Workshop made a conscious decision to remove the word model from the Wyldwood warscroll as it referred to Citadel Woods before the release of the Sylvaneth battletome.  Why remove that word if they clearly intended Citadel Woods to be models?

I think this discussion is done.  You have the answer to your question and you can choose to accept it or not.  Best to take your own advice about false arguments though, I would think.

[thediceabide]

17 minutes ago, Craptrain said:

Your argument is nonsensical and illogical.  You can very clearly meet the minimum by placing 1 Sylvaneth Wyldwood which consists of up to 3 Citadel Woods.  You're holding on to the notion that Citadel Woods are models when Games Workshop made a conscious decision to remove the word model from the Wyldwood warscroll as it referred to Citadel Woods before the release of the Sylvaneth battletome.  Why remove that word if they clearly intended Citadel Woods to be models?

I think this discussion is done.  You have the answer to your question and you can choose to accept it or not.  Best to take your own advice about false arguments though, I would think.

So you're saying that based on no actual printed rules whatsoever, that the best answer is that you ignore the min/max number of models, that was clearly a mistake (but it was not a mistake to remove the word "model" from Citadel Wood), and that this becomes the only ability in the game which summons an indeterminate number of non-models entities? And instead of Min/Max being about models, which it clearly states in the rules, for this situation, and only this situation, it has to do with the number of warscrolls that are bought together?

Just want to make sure I'm clear on understanding you.

My whole point is showing how illogical it is to say that Citadel Woods aren't models. Yes, the argument that you cannot use it at all is illogical, that's to illustrate how illogical the argument that they aren't models is. If you say that they aren't models, it causes far more rules discrepancies. Perhaps they removed the word model because there was no need for it? Maybe it was a copy/paste error? Maybe they didn't think that they needed to remind you that you are holding a model in your hand, and not some bizarre new construct of game terminology? I've never heard anyone argue before that a kit sold by GW once assembled is anything but a model.

The far simpler assumption is that a Citadel Wood is a model, otherwise you need to make up new rules to cover this situation. Like what do you do regarding the Min/Max NUMBER OF MODELS in a unit when the Warscroll has a Min/Max assigned, but contains no actual models? You can't say that the Max is on the number of Sylvaneth Wyldwoods because there is absolutely no support for that statement in the rules. If you think it's so intentional that they cut out the word models, then are you also saying they intended for an entirely new usage of the Min/Max, but also intended to not actually spell it out anywhere and it was their intention for players to infer from it whatever they want?

C'mon man, you can't be serious. It's easy to say a discussion is over when you don't have any actual support for your position.

EDIT:  I would be GLAD to change my perspective on the whole thing, if you could find any printed rule that supports your claim. Seriously. Show me where in the rules it says that the Min/Max for terrain warscrolls is in some way supposed to mean something different, or where in the rules it says that terrain warscrolls aren't bound by Min/Max models in a unit, and instead the min/max is meant to prevent you from taking duplicates of the warscroll itself, not the models it contains. 

My whole objective here is to find clarity in the rules, I don't give a ****** how many Wyldwoods a Sylvaneth player puts down, if it's what the rules state, right now we play with a sensible 2. Right now the best argument for anything other than 1, requires a ton of making up new rules that aren't actually printed anywhere.

[Arkiham]

29 minutes ago, thediceabide said:

Woah random tangent, what are you even talking about? All of those models have warscrolls... you can buy them from the GW store and on their warscrolls even show you a picture of what model to use. Oh hey, there's a thought, go look at the Wyldwood and tell me what model you see in the picture.

Oh, so like this 

 

And those models don't exist,  the warscrolls are from different models by different names. none of those warscrolls have a model, they've taken it from another warscroll.

Your reply is exactly what I was aiming for, you completely destroyed your own argument.

Hey, would you look at that, sylvaneth Wyldwood , using 3 citadel wood bases, on the store, to buy as a model. with their warscroll. fancy that.

[Craptrain]

6 minutes ago, thediceabide said:

So you're saying that based on no actual printed rules whatsoever, that the best answer is that you ignore the min/max number of models, that was clearly a mistake (but it was not a mistake to remove the word "model" from Citadel Wood), and that this becomes the only ability in the game which summons an indeterminate number of non-models entities? And instead of Min/Max being about models, which it clearly states in the rules, for this situation, and only this situation, it has to do with the number of warscrolls that are bought together?

Just want to make sure I'm clear on understanding you. 

You're not clear or understanding me.  I've already very clearly stated my position (as have others).  Since we're now resorting to straw man fallacies, I'm going to walk away from this discussion as I'd rather not get nasty (which clearly seems to be the tone this is starting to take).

[Choombatta]

To throw yet another wrench in this debate......

Check out the Annihilation Brotherhood battalion, and the Demolition Orders ability.

It clearly distinguishes between a "Terrain Feature" and a "piece of Scenery".

This is why I think the Wyldwood wording was changed. So players could not claim you only destroy a single Citadel Wood model when using this ability instead of destroying all 3 models.

I do not think the wording changed so you could ignore the Min/Max model count that they only just added to the Wyldwood.

[Nico]

Quote

It clearly distinguishes between a "Terrain Feature" and a "piece of Scenery".

No it doesn't. It mentions "scenery rules".

What is astonishing is that people still fail to read a row off a table. In the left column is Sylvaneth Wyldwood (not Citadel Wood) - that is the "model" (to use Unit terminology) in question which is subject to the min/max.

In the other column is the min max, which is 1. This is saying 1 Sylvaneth Wyldwood. 

It is not saying 1 Citadel Wood.

If you can show me where Citadel Woods are mentioned in this table, then you are right. However, you cannot do so.

[Choombatta]

12 minutes ago, Nico said:

No it doesn't. It mentions "scenery rules".

What is astonishing is that people still fail to read a row off a table. In the left column is Sylvaneth Wyldwood (not Citadel Wood) - that is the "model" (to use Unit terminology) in question which is subject to the min/max.

In the other column is the min max, which is 1. This is saying 1 Sylvaneth Wyldwood. 

It is not saying 1 Citadel Wood.

If you can show me where Citadel Woods are mentioned in this table, then you are right. However, you cannot do so.

Yes, it very clearly does if you actually read the ability.

It states you can pick a Terrain Feature( or a piece of scenery).............

It is a clear distinction.

It uses this exact wording 2 times in the ability description.

[Nico]

Quote

Yes, it very clearly does if you actually read the ability.

It states you can pick a Terrain Feature( or a piece of scenery).............

It is a clear distinction.

It uses this exact wording 2 times in the ability description.

Is it different in the App vs the Hard copy?

I doubt this is relevant anyway.

[thediceabide]

2 hours ago, Craptrain said:

You're not clear or understanding me.  I've already very clearly stated my position (as have others).  Since we're now resorting to straw man fallacies, I'm going to walk away from this discussion as I'd rather not get nasty (which clearly seems to be the tone this is starting to take).

Please help me understand and provide clarity, that's all I've asked.

Your argument seems to hinge on making up new rules to add to the game. Saying the Max 1 means a maximum of 1 Sylvaneth Wyldwoods, regardless of how many Citadel Woods it contains, is not based on any rule that I've been able to find (and if you can find it, PLEASE share it). Min and Max explicitly state they are in reference to model count within a unit.

Since Min/Max applies to MODELS within a unit that means one of two statements must be true:

1. Citadel Woods are models, and thus are limited to 1 per Sylvaneth Wyldwood in Matched Play.
2. Citadel Woods are not models, and thus are not limited to 1, but at the same time, also means you cannot meet the minimum of 1 model required by the Generals Handbook to have in the unit.

If it is wrong, please tell me where I can read the rules that say that the Min/Max limit in the General's Handbook doesn't apply to the models contained in a Sylvaneth Wyldwoods. But please, re-read the section of the GHB that explains what the Min/Max is before you claim that it somehow limits the number of Sylvaneth Wyldwoods, and not the number of models contained within them.

[Choombatta]

1 hour ago, Nico said:

Is it different in the App vs the Hard copy?

I doubt this is relevant anyway.

I am reading it from the Quest for Ghal Maraz book, where it was introduced.

The Annihilation Brotherhood that is.

[Craptrain]

29 minutes ago, thediceabide said:

Please help me understand and provide clarity, that's all I've asked.

Your argument seems to hinge on making up new rules to add to the game. Saying the Max 1 means a maximum of 1 Sylvaneth Wyldwoods, regardless of how many Citadel Woods it contains, is not based on any rule that I've been able to find (and if you can find it, PLEASE share it). Min and Max explicitly state they are in reference to model count within a unit.

Since Min/Max applies to MODELS within a unit that means one of two statements must be true:

1. Citadel Woods are models, and thus are limited to 1 per Sylvaneth Wyldwood in Matched Play.
2. Citadel Woods are not models, and thus are not limited to 1, but at the same time, also means you cannot meet the minimum of 1 model required by the Generals Handbook to have in the unit.

If it is wrong, please tell me where I can read the rules that say that the Min/Max limit in the General's Handbook doesn't apply to the models contained in a Sylvaneth Wyldwoods. But please, re-read the section of the GHB that explains what the Min/Max is before you claim that it somehow limits the number of Sylvaneth Wyldwoods, and not the number of models contained within them.

Faulty premise.  You're ignoring the fact that the model is the Sylvaneth Wyldwood itself, and not individual Citadel Woods.  Bowlzee and Nico have already explained that ad nauseum.  If you need further clarification you can ask one of them, because as I said, I am done.