Age of Sigmar FAQ update

[Nico]

Quote

It just kills my soul that the TK battalion isn't flexible at all with the Tomb King that must be included (no Royal Warsphinx/Settra any longer, etc.) and that all early battalions (those released more than 8 months ago or so) haven't been formatted to take into account the keyword as bold distinction, so they have to be played strait (which makes many of them either uninteresting or overcosted).

It's bad news for TK and Death in general.

It's looking increasingly likely that TK will not be in the next GH v2.0. I know some of the independent contributors to it hate them with a real passion. 

[TalesOfSigmar]

2 minutes ago, Nico said:

Do they really mean that multiple units of Fanatics are sucked out all at once, or just that if you declare a single unit of 6, you have to deploy all 6. However, you can still have a 6, a 2 and a 1 as 3 separate units.

Well the FAQ says;

Q: If I put more than one Grot Fanatic in the same unit of Moonclan Grots, can I release them over the course of several different turns, or must they all be released at the same time? Must all of the Fanatics that are released at the same time be placed within 1" of the unit that is hiding them?

A: They must all be released at the same time, and must all be placed within 1" of the unit that is hiding them

 

I would assume the wording saying They must all be released at the same time, means whether it's one unit or multiple units they all leave the same time.

[Thomas Lyons]

Just now, wayniac said:

I honestly don't get what that rule changed.  Can I get an "explain like I'm 5" example of where it ruins older battalions released like > 8 months or so?

See the image below:


If a battalion doesn't have a requirement bolded, then they now claim it is specifying a unit name.  Previously all battalion requirements were clarified in a prior FAQ to be keywords.  This was necessary because all battalions older than 8 months or so didn't have this updated formatting.  By this new ruling, all prior battalions may not treat their requirements as keywords (since they don't have the updated formatting).  These must be played as unit names.  The consequence of this is as follows:

• The Tomb Legion (TK Battalion) requires a Tomb King, but this spot may no longer be filled by Settra or a Royal Warsphinx (i.e. a Tomb King mounted on a Warsphinx), both who have the Tomb King keyword, since the Tomb King on the battalion scroll isn't bolded and thus only applies to the Tomb King (5 wound hero).
• Similarly, Skarsnik may no longer qualify for the Moonclan battalion since it requires a Night Goblin Warboss, which he has the right keyword but wrong unit name.
• And all other similar battalions, like Plague Priests on Plague Furnaces, Death Hags on Cauldrons of Blood, etc.

Does that help clarify what happened?

[Terry Pike]

Just for reference the FAQ has been removed from the site, probably doing some quick fixes at the moment

[wayniac]

3 minutes ago, Thomas Lyons said:

See the image below:


If a battalion doesn't have a requirement bolded, then they now claim it is specifying a unit name.  Previously all battalion requirements were clarified in a prior FAQ to be keywords.  This was necessary because all battalions older than 8 months or so didn't have this updated formatting.  By this new ruling, all prior battalions may not treat their requirements as keywords (since they don't have the updated formatting).  These must be played as unit names.  The consequence of this is as follows:

• The Tomb Legion (TK Battalion) requires a Tomb King, but this spot may no longer be filled by Settra or a Royal Warsphinx (i.e. a Tomb King mounted on a Warsphinx), both who have the Tomb King keyword, since the Tomb King on the battalion scroll isn't bolded and thus only applies to the Tomb King (5 wound hero).
• Similarly, Skarsnik may no longer qualify for the Moonclan battalion since it requires a Night Goblin Warboss, which he has the right keyword but wrong unit name.
• And all other similar battalions, like Plague Priests on Plague Furnaces, Death Hags on Cauldrons of Blood, etc.

Does that help clarify what happened?

Kinda, thank you.  It also just helps reinforce to me why one should take anything GW ever says with a grain of salt since many of their rulings are nonsensical, sometimes (often?) contradicts prior rulings for no reason, and in general why "by the book" Warhammer tends to be an exercise in frustration

[Nico]

I should say that I like almost all of these answers a lot and am very impressed by the timing.

The exceptions would be:

• I can see why the old battalions are being dumped, but it still hurts Greenskinz (who have a new AoS Start Collecting box, but now have no battalion).
• Smacking Dreadwood Wargrove as collateral damage when the real target is Free Spirits.

I know most people don't play Death; and think Death are overpowered; win all the major events and never lose; and they really hate their negative, frustrating #NewNurgle, defensive, Ward saves; bringing back models mechanics. So I can fully see why they got about 5 nerfs and zero buffs I could spot. Zombros seems harsh.

The multiple damage thing is actually old news. The answer is in the obscure location called the Hints and Tips section of every (semi-recent?) Battletome:

However, this was discussed a lot and then quietly shelved for months. I think we all agreed to house rule it the other way.

That said. Rolling a single dice for the damage of a unit or a monster (and yes I know that a monster is a unit), is both quicker and more swingy/unreliable; and a better word for swingy is dramatic.

Having a heavily wounded monster still manage to get lucky once in 6 tries and suddenly nail 18 dudes stabbing him to death with spears is really dramatic.

It creates a bigger trade off between dramatic damage and reliable damage. As part of list building you may want to balance these out. That's a skillful/fun thing as well.

It will also create new combos.

As for 36 mortal wounds from 6 Stormfiends. Please remove the imaginary magnet from under your 12 inch line of the board. They have a 26 inch effective/threat range. Don't stand in it. Judicators have a 29 inch effective range.

 

[StealthKnightSteg]

6 minutes ago, Terry Pike said:

Just for reference the FAQ has been removed from the site, probably doing some quick fixes at the moment

So they might have made an oopsie?

 

8 minutes ago, TalesOfSigmar said:

Well the FAQ says;

Q: If I put more than one Grot Fanatic in the same unit of Moonclan Grots, can I release them over the course of several different turns, or must they all be released at the same time? Must all of the Fanatics that are released at the same time be placed within 1" of the unit that is hiding them?

A: They must all be released at the same time, and must all be placed within 1" of the unit that is hiding them

 

I would assume the wording saying They must all be released at the same time, means whether it's one unit or multiple units they all leave the same time.

 

Or are they gonna clarify that you can put only one unit of fanatics in one other unit? That would clarify this FAQ more I think

[bottle]

10 minutes ago, Terry Pike said:

Just for reference the FAQ has been removed from the site, probably doing some quick fixes at the moment

That's good to know! :-) Hopefully some of the confusion can be cleared up. I am really happy to see GW update the FAQs too, as its great to see their commitment to improving the ruleset.

[Terry Pike]

4 minutes ago, Nico said:

As for 36 mortal wounds from 6 Stormfiends. Please remove the imaginary magnet from under your 12 inch line of the board. They have a 26 inch effective/threat range. Don't stand in it.

It has no effect on Warpfire Projectors or Starsoul Maces. These are not damage rolls.

[Donal]

4 minutes ago, Terry Pike said:

It has no effect on Warpfire Projectors or Starsoul Maces. These are not damage rolls.

maybe thats what the FAQ update is about

[Nico]

Quote

It has no effect on Warpfire Projectors or Starsoul Maces. These are not damage rolls.

Yes - this is true literally. I've taken another look at the Hints and Tips and it does say "Damage" as you say.

It would be worth spelling it out though in the FAQ, since that would remove a lot of confusion and concern.

Quote

maybe thats what the FAQ update is about

You just beat me to it!

As I said above I actually prefer the roll one dice for the whole unit thing. Then again I play Gordrakk who is captain swingy, but also a strong contender for most fun Warscroll in the game. 

[Andreas]

4 minutes ago, Terry Pike said:

It has no effect on Warpfire Projectors or Starsoul Maces. These are not damage rolls.

That's good I think. But what about for example Flamers or Tzaangor Skyfires and The Master of Destiny battle trait, could be quite good if this is actually the ruling.

[Requizen]

The most hotly contested ones in The Rules FAQ (which is the only one down atm) were the Damage Rolls and Battalion Keyword errata. I imagine that's what we're going to see here.

[Chris Tomlin]

On the D3 things, once the FAQ comes back up, its gonna be one of two ways;

1 - Roll once for entire unit; super mega swingy.

2 - Roll once for each model; super mega time consuming.

Interested to see how this one plays out!

[Terry Pike]

1 minute ago, Andreas said:

That's good I think. But what about for example Flamers or Tzaangor Skyfires and The Master of Destiny battle trait, could be quite good if this is actually the ruling.

Yeah it would work on them. take a unit of 9, buff them loads, delete an entire unit in one go. It will cost a lot, not always work, people will learn to deploy against it. Its just the meta/style of the game changing

[Forestreveries]

On the D3 things, once the FAQ comes back up, its gonna be one of two ways;
1 - Roll once for entire unit; super mega swingy.
2 - Roll once for each model; super mega time consuming.
Interested to see how this one plays out!

Much rather see a backtrack ;(


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

[HobbyHammer]

3 minutes ago, Forestreveries said:

Much rather see a backtrack ;(


Sent from the Hidden Enclaves via the Realmroots

Yer I must admit, i liked how it has been played up to this date. But Love the idea also of...

 

3 minutes ago, Forestreveries said:

On the D3 things, once the FAQ comes back up, its gonna be one of two ways;
1 - Roll once for entire unit; super mega swingy.

That just seems like so many ooooooohhhhhhhhhh moments! 

[KHHaunts]

2 hours ago, Chris Tomlin said:

Wow...that one is slightly strange. I've never heard of anyone playing it that way. As you say Coffee, super swingy now. Interesting. Not saying I don't like it, just really unexpected!!

Very interesting FAQ overall. Haven't had a chance to fully absorb it all yet though!

See i really dont like it. Not entirely sure why though.

Maybe it feels a little more fluffy (The random damage representing the damage of the weapon varying based on the strike and not the weapons "Powering up or Powering down)

Hey ho but still . . . .

[Nico]

Quote

1 - Roll once for entire unit; super mega swingy.

2 - Roll once for each model; super mega time consuming.

This is pretty much it.

Quote

Yeah it would work on them. take a unit of 9, buff them loads, delete an entire unit in one go. It will cost a lot, not always work, people will learn to deploy against it. Its just the meta/style of the game changing

There are plenty of other combos that could work like this too, not just Chaos. 

[wanderingrogue1]

Change the last sentence of the last paragraph to: ‘When determining random damage in step four of the attack sequence, generate the value for each successful attack the weapon makes; the result is the damage for that single successful attack. For example, a unit of Ironjaw Brutes makes 5 successful attacks with their Gore-choppas (Damage D3). This means you would roll 5D3 to determine the number of wounds inflicted by the attacks.’

 

super swingy it is

 

still annoying, no one needed or asked for this.

[Requizen]

Just now, wanderingrogue1 said:

Change the last sentence of the last paragraph to: ‘When determining random damage in step four of the attack sequence, generate the value for each successful attack the weapon makes; the result is the damage for that single successful attack. For example, a unit of Ironjaw Brutes makes 5 successful attacks with their Gore-choppas (Damage D3). This means you would roll 5D3 to determine the number of wounds inflicted by the attacks.’

 

super swingy it is

 

still annoying, no one needed or asked for this.

That's not the super swingy result, that's how it's currently played. They just backtracked to how everyone was already interpreting it.

Super swingy would have been d3 x 5

[wanderingrogue1]

oh i misread it lol... 

 

good  

[Thomas Lyons]

52 minutes ago, Nico said:

Tom you could probably rely on the more specific FAQ to rescue the Tomb King = Settra rule. It's not like they deleted that part of the FAQ and it's more specific to the question at hand.

I'm feeling the pain for all the Destruction factions that aren't BCR, Bonesplitterz or Ironjawz. #LongLivetheHoodedVillain

Netters getting comped (at least before I copied Darran Palmer and converted mine). Sigh! 

 

Do they really mean that multiple units of Fanatics are sucked out all at once, or just that if you declare a single unit of 6, you have to deploy all 6. However, you can still have a 6, a 2 and a 1 as 3 separate units.

Good call on the more specific FAQ.  I'm not sure anyone would buy it but one could at least try.

 

Regarding multiple units of Fanatics, I would agree that this is unclear.  It will likely be argued both ways, although with the recent assassin clarification, I don't see why fanatics would operated differently from other units hiding in units.  They are likely referring to each unit of Fanatics but this doesn't speak to what happens when you have multiple units hiding in a another unit (which the normal assassin FAQ answers should then kick in).

That said, I don't know that either of the Zombie FAQs settled the "can I merge 3 minimum sized battleline zombie units into a single block of 30 during my first turn."  One of the FAQs talked about merging units during setup (which is no, but that doesn't speak to it during play) and the other spoke about exceeding the maximum unit size (which is set for every unit in the GHB, 60 for zombies).  The wording points to the GHB value, not the starting unit size which is the rule that people said the Death players were violating.  It seems like there will still be debate on the Zombie issue for awhile.

 

[Ben Johnson]

Damage question updated. 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2016/12/22/faq-update-for-warhammer-age-of-sigmar/

[Nico]

 

Quote

 

Damage question updated. 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2016/12/22/faq-update-for-warhammer-age-of-sigmar/

 

Thanks again!

I take it that's the only change for now.

Quote

Having a heavily wounded monster still manage to get lucky once in 6 tries and suddenly nail 18 dudes stabbing him to death with spears is really dramatic.

It creates a bigger trade off between dramatic damage and reliable damage. As part of list building you may want to balance these out. That's a skillful/fun thing as well.

 

Oh well. That didn't last long. It was fun while it lasted.