Sylvaneth

[ChippyRick]

Steve, keep us updated on how that game goes. Like the list, although there isnt much in the way of units!!

Have you got any pics of your Durthu/Treelords? i was trying to find them on twitter from when you were working on the army but it was quite a while ago!
I am currently working on my Sylvaneth Army atm, and adding height to the back / top of Durthu / Treelords and Dryads, and i know you did similar, wanted to see how you did it?

 

[Stevewren]

These are my scratch built Treemen. If you want some cheap freemen then one Citadel Wood kit will make two treemen. 

[Stevewren]

Played my game Thursday night. We played the SCGT scenario 'Fire and Brimstone' which was quite good for me as it meant I could hide from the two Bastilodons my opponent had brought along. Shares list was a true Order list, made up of Fyreslayers (Hearthguard Berserkers, a Magmadroth and a Hero on Foot), Durthu, Dryads, a Carnosaur Lord, and the aforementioned two Bastis. 

With both of us having Durthu we very quickly had five Sylvaneth Wyldwoods on the table, and I was able to take advantage of the Spirit paths to get across the table fast. Durthu cleaned up the Dryads, and the Forest Dragon killed the Magmadroth before teaming up with a treeman to deal with Durthu. Another Treeman soloed the Carnosaur Lord which was surprising. I killed one Bastilodon with arcane bolt and a bit of shooting that got through. In the end it was a comfortable win - all I lost was Orion. 

I'm not sure what I learnt really, other than the monsters are still good, especially when there are no mortal wounds coming back at me.

One thing that I wanted to ask about is the Formation Guardians of the Deepwood - I read it that I can keep one unit off the table, but I've heard others say that you can keep as much back as you like. How have others been playing it? 

    

[Rhellion]

I've been playing all units in the formation can deep strike, after a twitter poll a month or two ago.

[Chris Tomlin]

Urghh that is not nicely worded at all! I honestly don't know what I think of that.

[Shane]

Instead of setting up a Treelord, Treelord Ancient or unit of Dryads...

Where does it say all?

[Bowlzee]

1 hour ago, Shane said:

Instead of setting up a Treelord, Treelord Ancient or unit of Dryads...

Where does it say all?

Agreed. From how I read it, it's just 1 unit of either Treelord/Treelord Ancient/Dryads.

The rest you'd have to deploy normally. Still very cool.

[Anodyr]

I'd definitely read this as singular - I don't see any part of that description that could be taken to mean more than one unit is affected by the rule. 

[Carnelian]

It's similar to the Thunderstruck Brotherhood  Stormcast Battalion which says "instead of setting up a unit...." and everyone I've met says this allows you to apply it to each unit. It's the same question here.  It says "a unit" not "a single unit" and so could be seen as implying you get to choose at the moment of setting up each unit from the Battalion. 

Is it in the FAQS?

[SeanMaguire1991]

On 16/05/2016 at 10:48 PM, Anodyr said:

Is Alarielle riding on the back of a giant stag beetle in that pic? 

Looks like a fusion between a Stag and Hercules Beetle because of the lower horn.

[Chris Tomlin]

4 hours ago, Carnelian said:

It says "a unit" not "a single unit" and so could be seen as implying you get to choose at the moment of setting up each unit from the Battalion.

Yeh I think this is what people who are arguing it applies to every unit would be suggesting. I can see where they are coming from, although I think I'd be in the camp of it just affecting one unit. Dunno, weird one. Shame about the wording as that could be made clear very easily.

[Shane]

4 hours ago, Carnelian said:

It's similar to the Thunderstruck Brotherhood  Stormcast Battalion which says "instead of setting up a unit...." and everyone I've met says this allows you to apply it to each unit. It's the same question here.  It says "a unit" not "a single unit" and so could be seen as implying you get to choose at the moment of setting up each unit from the Battalion. 

Is it in the FAQS?

Can you post the exacting wording for the Battalion? Interested to see the comparisons.

GW use unit as a singular in everything I've seen them write. Default is singular unless stated otherwise.

If a rule said "pick a unit and do X" would you read that to mean as many units as you want because it doesn't say "single"? The RAI of this formation could very well be all but it certainly isn't worded in such a manner. That's why I'm interested to see the exact wording on this other formation.

 

The poorest wording for a rule still goes to the Pestilens virulent horde formation. That is a complete mess.

 

Edit: Perhaps the rule was written in a physical manner (i.e. to be followed as you play). In this manner, the rule activates as you're deploying. It allows you to put aside a unit instead of putting it on the battlefield; it later appearing. Your opponent then deploys a unit and so forth per the vanilla rules.

So I put a unit down, you put one down, I put one down, you do the same, I then use the formation to "place it to once side", then you put a unit down, I put one down. Etc.

[Anodyr]

4 hours ago, Carnelian said:

It's similar to the Thunderstruck Brotherhood  Stormcast Battalion which says "instead of setting up a unit...." and everyone I've met says this allows you to apply it to each unit. It's the same question here.  It says "a unit" not "a single unit" and so could be seen as implying you get to choose at the moment of setting up each unit from the Battalion. 

Is it in the FAQS?

Is that considered to be an acceptable interpretation of the rule for that battalion? Don't have the scroll handy so can't read it in full at the mo but to me, interpreting "a unit" as "any and potentially all available units" seems like a wilful misinterpretation of the rule to gain an unfair and unintended advantage. Obviously I could be wrong and they could FAQ it to make it clear that the intention is for multiple units to be affected, but I genuinely can't read that in a way that suggests this was the intent. There are plenty of opportunities to use a pluralised (sp?) phrase in that description and the fact that gw haven't done so suggests to me that the intent is to affect just the one unit. 

I don't know, sometimes it just seems like what is needed isn't a rule clarification, it's for people to stop trying to be gamey with what they've been given. ?

[Anodyr]

Random supportive theoretical situation that just occurred to me that I think is applicable:

A magician asks you to "pick a card, any card". How many cards do you pick?

[Shane]

4 hours ago, Carnelian said:

Thunderstruck Brotherhood  Stormcast Battalion..

Is it in the FAQS?

This has been FAQ'd (as it were) and is for all units. 

So you may be right with this Sylvaneth one but I'd like to compare wording first.

[Zen]

On 21 May 2016 at 10:39 AM, Stevewren said:

One thing that I wanted to ask about is the Formation Guardians of the Deepwood - I read it that I can keep one unit off the table, but I've heard others say that you can keep as much back as you like. How have others been playing it? 

    

I'm fairly sure that you're allowed to keep as many units from the battalion in reserve as you want. Compare to the Thunderstrike battalion:

First part is worded almost exactly the same. Only difference is that the unit types are specified in the Guardians of the Deepwood battalion. But that is most likely so that people don't try to deploy one of the two Sylvaneth Wyldwoods in the battalion in reserve.

 

[Anodyr]

Gaah! You're right in saying the wording is pretty damn close. Having read the storm cast one knowing that the FAQs say that it affects all units, I can't argue that it should be any different for the sylvaneth. If the stormcasts can drop pod in en masse, why shouldn't the tree spirits all burst out of the forests?! ?

I think I have to do a full 180 on this and agree that you should be able to apply it to all the units in the battalion. 

(Given that I've just picked up a load of dryads ready to throw myself on the sylvaneth bandwagon when the new stuff drops, I'm actually surprisingly pleased about being proven wrong! ?).

[Shane]

Looking at this now I agree it being all units. Written as is, it isn't. But the intention and FAQ clears it up. So it is.

Still nothing on that Pestilens formation writing. 

[Stevewren]

To be honest I think it didn't make much difference. We played two Sylvaneth woods on the table, and I didn't take Durthu. My opponent just plonked a manticore Lord in the centre of the wood and that prevented me from deep striking or tree surfing anything as it's impossible to get within 3" of the wood but be 9" away from an enemy model. 

It's important to note that we played a single citadel wood as a wild wood, rather than using 2 kits to make one wood. 

Again this ability looks like one of those ones that might work well against an inexperienced player, and possibly ruin their fun, but be completely redundant against anyone who understands how the formation works. 

[ProvokedTree]

9 hours ago, Stevewren said:

To be honest I think it didn't make much difference. We played two Sylvaneth woods on the table, and I didn't take Durthu. My opponent just plonked a manticore Lord in the centre of the wood and that prevented me from deep striking or tree surfing anything as it's impossible to get within 3" of the wood but be 9" away from an enemy model. 

It's important to note that we played a single citadel wood as a wild wood, rather than using 2 kits to make one wood. 

Again this ability looks like one of those ones that might work well against an inexperienced player, and possibly ruin their fun, but be completely redundant against anyone who understands how the formation works. 

That is when you start casting "Awakening the Wood" on them to rack up mortal wounds. Up to 6 mortal wounds per Treelord Ancient if they are all close enough to to get the wood to start rustling.

[Bowlzee]

Also, how did they get a Manticore in the middle of a wood? It's a pretty big model and not much space between the trees.

But yeah, 'Awakening the Wood' would help in that situation  

[Stevewren]

On 28 May 2016 at 5:57 PM, Bowlzee said:

Also, how did they get a Manticore in the middle of a wood? It's a pretty big model and not much space between the trees.

But yeah, 'Awakening the Wood' would help in that situation  

Awakening the wood is a good idea, although by the time I got close enough he'd come out and I was busy casting mystic shield to try and fight Archaon! 

The manticore fitted OK - the oval dropped into the gap between the three trees, which aren't the GW ones. I replaced mine with railway ones so they are greener, and a bit more realistic. 

[Bowlzee]

1 hour ago, Stevewren said:

The manticore fitted OK - the oval dropped into the gap between the three trees, which aren't the GW ones. I replaced mine with railway ones so they are greener, and a bit more realistic. 

Ahh ok. I have 4 sets, and they would certainly struggle to fit them in  

[Tzr]

Has anyone running Durthu been able to make effective use of his Tree Singing ability? Played my first couple of games with him at the weekend; getting two citadel woods down on the board 6" away from another model and be useful to me was tough. Second time round we played it with just one wood qualifies and that did allow for some teleporting shenanigans.

Excited for the new Sylvaneth stuff that seems to be coming, hopefully they make the army abilities a little less reliant on Wyldwoods to trigger. You can catch people out with it once, but someone who has actually read the scrolls can play around them too easily.

[Stevewren]

I'm running Durthu this weekend at an event so I'll try out his treesinging in at least one game. 

I'm actually more interested in seeing how the Nomad Prince does using his +1 to hit with the Glade guard, as they have been pretty unspectacular in most games I've used them so far. 

The full list is: 

1 x Nomad Prince (1) 4
1 x Branch wraith (1) 4
1 x Durthu (1) 18
1 x Glade Lord on Forest Dragon (1) 20
1 x Spell weaver (1) 4
1 x Spell weaver (1) 4
1 x Orion, King in the Woods (1) 13
1 x Eternal Guard (10) 5 
2 x Dryads (20) 10 
3 x Glade Guard (30) 18
2 x Treeman (2) 26 
1 x Treeman Ancient (1) 14
Formation: Guardians of the Deepwood (10)
Total: 150

The first game is against a Death force with Neferata. I'm hoping that by deploying all the wizards I can really set about zapping her with mortal wounds to get rid of the no rend ability. He also has a mourngul. I guess I'd better read up on that dude as he is all the rage apparently!