Let's chat Disciples of Tzeentch

[Nico]

This means you don't have to dip into your Allies for the Fatesworn Battalion.

[TheOtherJosh]

[mention=163]Nico[/mention] - this one?

 

“4. Allegiance: If a battalion has an allegiance, its units can be included in an army that has that allegiance even if they do not have that keyword on their warscroll. However, its units only benefit from that army’s allegiance abilities if they have the appropriate keyword on their warscroll. A battalion can still be part of any allegiance that all its units have on their warscrolls.” Excerpt From: “Chaos Battletome: Disciples of Tzeentch.”

 

I believe the section you're talking about is the one I bolded?

 

 Though ... that seems to potentially be counter to p.117 in the new GHB 2017 edition:

 

“WARSCROLL BATTALIONS

When picking your army’s allegiance, all units in a warscroll battalion are considered to have the allegiance noted above the title on the warscroll.” Excerpt From: Games Workshop Ltd. “General's Handbook 2017.”

 

Or am I missing something?

 

Edit: It is just a clarification of the first sentence... so it looks like we're still good.

 

[Nico]

A friend has pointed out that Battleline units cannot be understrength (new GHB2017 rule) - this seems to serve no other purpose than to make the Everchosen Battalions weaker - maybe that's why they cost so little.

[TheOtherJosh]

A friend has pointed out that Battleline units cannot be understrength (new GHB2017 rule) - this seems to serve no other purpose than to make the Everchosen Battalions weaker - maybe that's why they cost so little.

 

There is a difference between Understrength and Below Minimum Size:

 

“An under-strength unit that is less than the minimum unit size cannot be used to fulfil the requirements for the battleline units in an army..."

 

For example:

Tzaangor minimum size of unit is 5 on the Warscroll.

The Pitched Battle Profile says "10" for 180.

 

I could put out 6 (all the models from my ST boxed set). Meeting minimum size, but it would still be under-strength and I'd get charged 180 points. But it would qualify as Battleline because it is not less than the minimum size on the Warscroll.

 

This was actually in the prior GHB (indirectly) as well. (Though I didn't see the original reference myself.)

 

The v1.1 FAQ had the following:

Q:In Pitched Battles, does the Under-strength Units rule override the restriction in the rules for warscrolls that says you can only field one unit that is of less than the minimum size?

A: No. Also, note that a unit can be ‘under-strength’ and still above minimum size. For example, a unit of 7 Liberators would be above the minimum size but still under-strength.

[Nico]

While you're right about the distinction between understrength and below minimum size, Looking at the page in the GHB - Minimum size is a reference to the GHB min size (page 86) and not the Warscroll. So it doesn't help for 10 Acolytes. 

9 Chaos Warriors however would work.

[TheOtherJosh]

While you're right about the distinction between understrength and below minimum size, Looking at the page in the GHB - Minimum size is a reference to the GHB min size (page 86) and not the Warscroll. So it doesn't help for 10 Acolytes. 

9 Chaos Warriors however would work.

 

This is back to poor verbiage.

 

The page reference has no differentiation between minimum size and under-strength by using their definitions on p. 86. (Under-Strength == Less than minimum Size)

 

It's similar to my frustration with the lack of differentiation and interchange in language between Faction and Allegiance.

 

The side question might be, that if you're taking a Disciples of Tzeentch Faction force, can you actually take Warriors of Chaos (with Mark of Tzeentch) as battleline? Given that StoD are listed as an allied force?

 

They meet the "Alliance" rule ... but they don't meet the "Faction" rule.

 

So, are army rosters made from Faction "Pitched Battle Profiles"? Or are they made from Alliance Compatibility? (I.e. They're both Alliance:Tzeentch)

 

For Factions that do not have the same name as their Alliance name... how does this work?

[Leonardas]

You can't take allies as battleline


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nico]

I think the context is clear - it talks about paying points for multiples of the minimum size - plainly referring to a GHB minimum (not Warscroll minimum). 

Worth bearing in mind that GW have adopted a relatively "fun" and elegant style of rules drafting rather than dry legalese - a good thing overall for a game.

[Arkiham]

2 minutes ago, TheOtherJosh said:

 

This is back to poor verbiage.

The page reference has no differentiation between minimum size and under-strength by using their definitions on p. 86.

It's similar to my frustration with the lack of differentiation and interchange in language between Faction and Allegiance.

The side question might be, that if you're taking a Disciples of Tzeentch Faction force, can you actually take Warriors of Chaos (with Mark of Tzeentch) as battleline? Given that StoD are listed as an allied force?

They meet the "Alliance" rule ... but they don't meet the "Faction" rule.

So, are army rosters made from Faction "Pitched Battle Profiles"? Or are they made from Alliance Compatibility? (I.e. They're both Alliance:Tzeentch)

For Factions that do not have the same name as their Alliance name... how does this work?

 

you are really confusing yourself friend and others.

 

slaves to darkness work in any list you want a god allegiance for. khorne nurgle tzeentch slaanesh but only as that allegiance. 

 

 

[Nico]

They made the point about the Chaos gods crystal clear in the launch of DoT - fully inclusive of all Tzeentch keyword warscrolls. Same for Khorne.

[TheOtherJosh]

you are really confusing yourself friend and others.   slaves to darkness work in any list you want a god allegiance for. khorne nurgle tzeentch slaanesh but only as that allegiance.  

 

 

 The Alliance:Tzeentch is met so, destiny dice are able to be used. However, you're not actually making a "Diciples of Tzeentch" Faction army. 

Faction:Tzeentch doesn't exist (in the Pitched Battle Profiles). Faction:DoT does.

 

You're just making a "generic" Chaos Army. With Allegiance: [insert chaos deity here]

 

And Generic Chaos (Tzeentch) doesn't have any "allied Force Lists". No list of allies means that your entire force has to be keyworded for Tzeentch.

 

 

 

[Arkiham]

4 minutes ago, TheOtherJosh said:

 The Alliance:Tzeentch is met so, destiny dice are able to be used. However, you're not actually making a "Diciples of Tzeentch" Faction army.

 

Faction:Tzeentch doesn't exist. Faction:DoT does.

 

You're just making a "generic" Chaos Army. With Allegiance: [insert chaos deity here]

 

And Generic Chaos (Tzeentch) doesn't have any "allied Force Lists". No list of allies means that your entire force has to be keyworded for Tzeentch.

 

 

i dunno. looks like there is to me.... 

[AverageBoss]

10 hours ago, TheOtherJosh said:

 

As they say "on the internet" 'Well that's just your opinion, bro.'

 

But seriously, flamers received a price drop and are solid shooting. If you have a mobile Tzeentch Daemon hero nearby they have a chance to reinforce themselves with locus of transmogrification. (And you want mobile because they're fast moving.)

 

They're not as good in melee, but with a high movement value and a solid 18" range on ranged attacks and the battalion ability to help get the loc into position for spells .... it would be both outside the prior meta, and a completely different Army to play. And the only "tax" to do it is the requirement for a herald on Chariot. (Outside of the battalions.)

 

It was a suggestion to answer a specific question of dealing with high movement units and units with range as a Tzeentch Daemon player without going the Skyfire Spam route. (Which is now much more expensive @ 200 points each ...)

 

What would your suggestion be as an answer to SCE chariots and longstrikes, without going Skyfire Spam given issues with the change to the Changehost battalion and Balewind Vortex?

They did not get anywhere near the points drop they need to justify use imo. You are still paying 180 points, for a 6 wound, 5+ save unit, with ranged attacks that lack rend. They get 9 shots that hit on 4+, so average 4.5. Then they wound on 3+, so average 2.97 (we will say 3). The worst armor Stormcasts have is 4+ (and they have plenty of ways to buff that). So 1.5 wounds get through, multiplied to an average of 3 damage. After that you have a 50% chance of dealing D3 MWs, or a 1/6 chance of healing back some of the damage you just did.

Pretty much every other ranged unit I can think of in the same point range will outperform Flamers, defensively, offensively, or often times both. Vanguard Raptors are the same points. Judicators are cheaper, and battleline. You could take 50 Brimstone Horrors for the same points, 60 for 20 points more.

I am not giving an answer to Aetherwing lists, because outside Skyfires, and Balewind buffed spells we have few things that can touch things that far away. I am simply stating that I don't feel Flamers are an answer.

[TheOtherJosh]

i dunno. looks like there is to me.... 

Correct: It's a "Choose Allegiance" not "Choose Faction".

“Pitched Battle profiles are split into a number of factions. For example, Gors and Ungors are part of the BRAYHERDS faction."

Allegiance is the "bonus" you get for sticking with a specific Faction.

In this circumstance, the Allegiance and the Faction don't match.

In the chaos gods side for Allegiance, it's loose. BoK, StoD all can have Allegiance:Khorne. DoT, StoD can both have Allegiance:Tzeentch

However, BoK and StoD have different Allies lists. As do DoT and StoD.

If I'm attempting to create a DoT Faction army, can one actually use StoD Marauders/Warriors of Chaos units as Battleline? They're not in the DoT faction lists.

They're legit from a Allegiance: Tzeentch perspective... but if I wanted to bring in something not keyworded Tzeentch.... say Chaos Gargant. What Faction do I use to keep Allegiance:Tzeentch since there is no Faction:Tzeentch in the Pitched Battle Profiles.

[Arkiham]

1 minute ago, TheOtherJosh said:

 

Correct: It's a "Choose Allegiance" not "Choose Faction".

“Pitched Battle profiles are split into a number of factions. For example, Gors and Ungors are part of the BRAYHERDS faction."

Allegiance is the "bonus" you get for sticking with a specific Faction.

In this circumstance, the Allegiance and the Faction don't match.

In the chaos gods side for Allegiance, it's loose. BoK, StoD all can have Allegiance:Khorne. DoT, StoD can both have Allegiance:Tzeentch

However, BoK and StoD have different Allies lists. As do DoT and StoD.

If I'm attempting to create a DoT Faction army, can one actually use StoD Marauders/Warriors of Chaos units as Battleline? They're not in the DoT faction lists.

They're legit from a Allegiance: Tzeentch perspective... but if I wanted to bring in something not keyworded Tzeentch.... say Chaos Gargant. What Faction do I use to keep Allegiance:Tzeentch since there is no Faction:Tzeentch in the Pitched Battle Profiles.

 

it'll be something that everything in your list can ally with. 

so both can ally with everchosen or chaos gargants.

you keep your tzeentch allegiance run chaos warriors as battleline and the ally pool is taken up by gargant or everchosen units is what it looks like to me. 

[Swamp_Toe]

so when are we having the memorial for the changehost?

[TheOtherJosh]

it'll be something that everything in your list can ally with. 

so both can ally with everchosen or chaos gargants.

you keep your tzeentch allegiance run chaos warriors as battleline and the ally pool is taken up by gargant or everchosen units is what it looks like to me. 

The issue is that the chaos warriors aren't "in the Pitched Battle Profile" for Faction:DoT. They're an Allied faction. Allies can't be Battleline.

One could roll over to Faction:StoD to get marauders and chaos warriors as battleline, but then the DoT units become Allies. And you're spending your ally points on DoT units. The situation is just reversed.

We're then back to, one could go "generic Tzeentch" ... but "Faction:Tzeentch" doesn't actually exist, so there is no Faction:Tzeentch allies list.

So, no faction allies means that to keep Alliance:Tzeentch you can't take stuff like the Gargant or Jabberslyth because they can't be keyworded to Tzeentch.

[Iradekhorne]

Guys, dont get confused.

Read the warscrolls, you can give to all Slaves to darkness the proper mark.

The Dot and Khorne books only demand the tzeentch and khorne keyword, even if the warscroll have more allegiance keyword,they only demand the proper keyword.

Thats why slaughterbrute and mutalisk are playables in theese armies.

One unit can have infinite allegiance keywords, but ingame they need to choose one allegiance.

A Chaos warrior with tzeentch, slaanesh or khorne mark can be part of tzeentch, slaanesh and khorne army, and part of slaaves to darkness army. You only need choose one.

Thats why Chaos surpased destruction and death number of players, cause his variety is enourmus, is the second biggest grand alliance of the game.

[AverageBoss]

23 minutes ago, Iradekhorne said:

A Chaos warrior with tzeentch, slaanesh or khorne mark can be part of tzeentch, slaanesh and khorne army, and part of slaaves to darkness army. You only need choose one.

Thats why Chaos surpased destruction and death number of players, cause his variety is enourmus, is the second biggest grand alliance of the game.

Ya, I wish Death would take the same approach, giving multiple models, multiple keywords. Mortis Engine being Deathmage + Nighthaunt, Neferatta being Deathlord + Soulblight, etc.

Chaos has a good thing going here.

[TheOtherJosh]

 

In retrospect, I've come to the realization that my frustration is actually with Allies and the implementation for Factions where their name doesn't match their Allegiance name.

 

The flexibility of Allegiance:Tzeentch or Khorne "Alliance Soup" (where as long as one has the deity keyword the unit is choose-able) to take units across the chaos pantheon that can be keyworded is lost at the point when you want to actually take Allies that can't be keyworded.

 

Because that requires one to make the core "Faction" choice. Are you going BoK/DoT or StoD for the core? Either directional choice is a compromise and loss of flexibility. (In comparison to Chaos Deity Alliance Soup, and possibly a requirement to use Ally points for the "Alliance Soup units.")

 

It is, I suppose, like Mr. Miyagi from the Karate Kid said: "Karate Yes, Okay. Karate No, Ok. Karate So-So, Squish"

 

The question that the player has to ask is: Which kind of flexibility does one want? Chaos Deity Alliance Soup? Or Chaos Faction and Chaos Faction Allies?

 

[Hightime]

Hello All

 

Considering taking the following list to a 2.5k Tournament, my other thought for a list was no skyfires and use Host Diplicitious instead, but im leaning towards having more punch then shenanigans.

Would love to know what some competitive players think.

Tzeentch cheese.pdf

[Malakithe]

Im still have trouble coming up with something for 2k. I really like Tzaangors and LoC but I dont know what is effective now

[Ratso]

28 minutes ago, TheOtherJosh said:

 

The issue is that the chaos warriors aren't "in the Pitched Battle Profile" for Faction:DoT. They're an Allied faction. Allies can't be Battleline.

One could roll over to Faction:StoD to get marauders and chaos warriors as battleline, but then the DoT units become Allies. And you're spending your ally points on DoT units. The situation is just reversed.

We're then back to, one could go "generic Tzeentch" ... but "Faction:Tzeentch" doesn't actually exist, so there is no Faction:Tzeentch allies list.

So, no faction allies means that to keep Alliance:Tzeentch you can't take stuff like the Gargant or Jabberslyth because they can't be keyworded to Tzeentch.

 

I get what your saying how the DoT book clearly outlined 3 types of armies, Daemon, Arcanities and mortals. Now yes mortals did not get a lot of love in the book primarily due there already being content out plus the factor that a mortal tzeentch army is more based on their 'mark' not the keyword so I get why they are not in the pitched battle section in the DoT book. Based on that theory all references in the DoT book to 'mortal' armies would only relate to chaos spawns as they are the only mortal units referenced in the pitched battle section which would be a bit silly. Also from memory(sorry don't have the book in front of me) the critic for an army to use the Tzeentch allergience is that all units have the keyword or mark allowing marauders and warriors to be used as battle line for tzeentch mortal armies in matched play.

[Nico]

They clearly didn't want to write out all the StoD units FIVE times in all of the God Factions and again under StoD (and sticking Archaon in 5 places too). Reading the DoT and Khorne books, it's clear that the Allegiance is Tzeentch and Khorne respectively and that DoT and BoK are broadly equivalent to these.

[hobgoblinclub]

In regard to the allies situation, approach it from the perspective that DoT can include any Tzeentch marked warscroll, not just the ones in the book, and it becomes much simpler. 

Can anyone see the need for a distinction between Tzeentch and DoT in the app?