Death FAQ

[WSDdeloach]

Wight King is still good with legion of death. Read the key words

[thediceabide]

4 hours ago, Miarbi said:

What about the Sylvaneth artifact: Seed of rebirth?? It's the same as the ring? Does it costs reinforcements points?

It's worded totally different, and is an awful item since it doesn't get you away from what is killing you. Typically with the Seed of Rebirth, you take your last wound then another unit within 3" piles in and finishes you off. 

[deynon]

5 hours ago, WSDdeloach said:

Wight King is still good with legion of death. Read the key words

the problem is that. The lust of units has not the "bold" characters so it's the name of the units and does 't exist a unit called simply Wight Knoghts.

[Tizianolol]

legion of death is not part of compendium.. At moment you can buy only wight King with blade/ wight King with axe. For sure in this case axe/blade can be part of battalion

you can t buy only "wight King" so the problem doesn t exist imo

[Razorfate]

18 hours ago, mmimzie said:

As i've been playing it this way for some time, and am yet still undefeated i think it's quite fine. Been using it on my vampire lord since the generals hand book came out. It's quite worth it for  an average 7 wounds model with a powerful command ability for buffing my zombies. This command ability i'd not have access too if i took too VLs and the one that was my general died. 

 

On a Vl the ring is quite well worth it because you get your normal would plus you can drink from the cup meaning you'll most likely have full wounds again.  Plus the model is little and can hide well

I accept that VL 's command ability is nice and he is defienetly playable against old factions such as dwarfs, high elves etc. But what will you do if two or three thundertusk deals 18 MW per turn, or 6 stormfiends deals 12d3 MW? Iam trying to say Death is quite strong against old factions, but Stormcast, Skyre Stormfiends, Beastclaws, Sylvaneth will steamroll us.
 

[Ashtyn]

18 minutes ago, Razorfate said:

I accept that VL 's command ability is nice and he is defienetly playable against old factions such as dwarfs, high elves etc. But what will you do if two or three thundertusk deals 18 MW per turn, or 6 stormfiends deals 12d3 MW? Iam trying to say Death is quite strong against old factions, but Stormcast, Skyre Stormfiends, Beastclaws, Sylvaneth will steamroll us.
 

Death have a guaranteed 5 plus dmg buffer against mortal wounds. 

Not to mention a VL can easily be screened by larger models.

Death have a good chance to evade a large amount of mortal wound damage (more then other alliances).

Our heavy hitting units also gain a extra benefit from MW negation (morghasts, Mourngul) and can be used to screen.

Our potential to heal is also large on many of these models. VL can drink, Mourngul heals, FEC bring models back, I could list many more.

If we use large tanky monsters to screen smaller heroes that provide strong regenerative buffs, I see Death being able to grind some opponents out.

I do feel that we are a little limited to horde style games at present. But we are also the only alliance with 1 battletome, a old one that doesn't even include command abilities or a specific theme (bring more models onto the table) that works in a matched play setting (reinforcement points).

I hope they update the FEC book with lore and new command abilities (they probably won't)  when Gh V 2 is released. I'm sure that our next battletome will signify a specific theme that will work in a matched play setting.

Anyhow, on MW's I think we have built in defence.

[TerrorPenguin]

So someone just pointed out to me 

I can make my General a skeleton in a block of 40 Skeletons and take ruler of the night. He gives inspiring presence to that block so it doesn't take battleshock. I have a 5+ special save across the board with 40 wounds regenerating d6 wounds per turn 10" from that unit.

If it is from that unit and not from the generals model that could be spread 40" across the board.

Basically the 5+ save is not going away

[Countmoore]

1 of 40 skeletons is still easy to take out. I'm thinking 1 of 12 crypt horrors myself. More wounds and much more tanky. 

[Squirrelmaster]

26 minutes ago, TerrorPenguin said:

So someone just pointed out to me 

I can make my General a skeleton in a block of 40 Skeletons and take ruler of the night. He gives inspiring presence to that block so it doesn't take battleshock. I have a 5+ special save across the board with 40 wounds regenerating d6 wounds per turn 10" from that unit.

If it is from that unit and not from the generals model that could be spread 40" across the board.

Basically the 5+ save is not going away

I'm pretty sure Ruler of the Night would only be measured from the model you have chosen as your general, not his unit.

But, yeah. I've been considering a Red Fury Necrosphinx for a while, now.

[mmimzie]

9 hours ago, Razorfate said:

I accept that VL 's command ability is nice and he is defienetly playable against old factions such as dwarfs, high elves etc. But what will you do if two or three thundertusk deals 18 MW per turn, or 6 stormfiends deals 12d3 MW? Iam trying to say Death is quite strong against old factions, but Stormcast, Skyre Stormfiends, Beastclaws, Sylvaneth will steamroll us.
 

my VL has yet to be one shot by the thundertusk and stormfiends can on occasion, but that's why the ring of immortality is so good. First you have to actually kill the VL, so you use all your shooting that is needed to kill her, and that's if the wall of zombies permits you to be in range to make your shooting attack. Then, she dies and goes else where some where else on the map completely, but with the long reach of the zombie unit stretched accross the board like a rubber ban she is still able to provide her buffs to the whole army. However, i get to chose where i go and it's not only possible <.< it's more than likely i'll have a safe place for her to flee. Then it's my turn and my zombies one shot the thunder tuisk or stormfiends in question???

A VLoZD is good, but it's not the most amazing in the world either. Comparing survival, i can pay for my VL twice with the ring and get 6-10 wounds off the model for 280 points(2.1-3.6 wound per points value 2.87 average) a stronger command ability for my zombies and a smaller profile to hide in the ranks of my zombies it also needs to be shot at by two separate units to be taken down in a single turn giving a form of evasion.  The VLOZD has 14 wounds with no mortal wound evasion outside of deathless minion and is big and fat for 440 points (3.2 wound per point value).   So while the VL is maybe on average squishier by a little bit she  has extra evasion in the form of being able to move to a point in the map where she is out of range of further shooting attacks or even out of LOS. 

as for storm cast, Beastclaws, and now Syhlvaneth(got a few games recently against a few competitive list). I have yet to have a tough time. Sure the VL has died and come back, but she always sticks around for 3 or 4 turns more than enough to make up her points in triplicate. 

As far as death's strength i think it comes down to our weakness in the battalion section in most games you'll either have a kind of bad list or you wont get to pick who goes first, and as such your almsot certainly gonna spend your first turn doing what ever your opponent wants. If it's alpha strike they can take first to keep you on your side of the board, or take second to burn your first turn and try to double turn you with strong shooting. 

I think with all the summoning death has and all the very tough models we have no choice but to be the army that weathers the storm and grinds out victories. THe current nature of objective scoring doesn't really lend it self to this however, as the current scenarios can all be won in about 2 or 3 turns. 

[Zerthin]

@mmimzie

I do see your point but you failed to address my post from previous page. Your newly ressurected VL should loose his/hers Command Trait as it's new unit and thus not the one you named your general. This (besides teleport option - and we already have another artifact for that) still makes ring inferior to picking 2 vampires as with ring you have to put your general in front lines and with picking 2 VLs one can madly charge while general uses his abilities from far behind.

 

[mmimzie]

5 hours ago, Zerthin said:

@mmimzie

I do see your point but you failed to address my post from previous page. Your newly ressurected VL should loose his/hers Command Trait as it's new unit and thus not the one you named your general. This (besides teleport option - and we already have another artifact for that) still makes ring inferior to picking 2 vampires as with ring you have to put your general in front lines and with picking 2 VLs one can madly charge while general uses his abilities from far behind.

 

Sure, but i think your wrong here. I didn't as you say fail to address i simply ignored it as the rules are quite clear on what a general is, and that your general or what ever model using this ring is being resurrected in full.
 

The wording for the ring states it's the same dude:

"If the model bearing this ring is slain, set IT up again anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 12" from any enemy models. The model is RESTORED with D3 wounds remaing. Once used, the ring can't be used again in the same battle."

 

So we'll start from first bold part to the last numbering 1, 2, and 3.

1. IT is used as a pronoun hear refering to the model bearing this ring.  You are setting up the same model again. Note models are set up as your general and as such since it is the same model being set up it is still your general, as the wording quite clearing states we are setting up this model again.

2. Restored showing that it is indeed that model is again being restored. Note no where do the rule state that models lose thier status as general upon death, and no where does it say a model loses it's command trait for dying. It also does no where say that a model loses it's artifacts upon death, which is why.....

3.  Once used, the ring can't be used again in the same battle. As the word THE is used as opposed to  A  the sentence is telling us that we are talking about the very specific ring of immortality worn by the restored model. As such, it is informing to us that the model still has the ring, which is best stoned to a specific hero and as such they keep thier ring, command ability, and status as general. 

 

As such it does keep its command ability, trait, and ring even upon returning from the dead. So it is not inferior is it is better if retaining command ability and trait are important to you.

[deynon]

59 minutes ago, mmimzie said:

Sure, but i think your wrong here. I didn't as you say fail to address i simply ignored it as the rules are quite clear on what a general is, and that your general or what ever model using this ring is being resurrected in full.
 

The wording for the ring states it's the same dude:

"If the model bearing this ring is slain, set IT up again anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 12" from any enemy models. The model is RESTORED with D3 wounds remaing. Once used, the ring can't be used again in the same battle."

 

So we'll start from first bold part to the last numbering 1, 2, and 3.

1. IT is used as a pronoun hear refering to the model bearing this ring.  You are setting up the same model again. Note models are set up as your general and as such since it is the same model being set up it is still your general, as the wording quite clearing states we are setting up this model again.

2. Restored showing that it is indeed that model is again being restored. Note no where do the rule state that models lose thier status as general upon death, and no where does it say a model loses it's command trait for dying. It also does no where say that a model loses it's artifacts upon death, which is why.....

3.  Once used, the ring can't be used again in the same battle. As the word THE is used as opposed to  A  the sentence is telling us that we are talking about the very specific ring of immortality worn by the restored model. As such, it is informing to us that the model still has the ring, which is best stoned to a specific hero and as such they keep thier ring, command ability, and status as general. 

 

As such it does keep its command ability, trait, and ring even upon returning from the dead. So it is not inferior is it is better if retaining command ability and trait are important to you.

 

unlucky it's not so, cause based on the FAQ you are summoning a new model otherways you'd no pay for it again. Your argument is not wrong and it's the argument used before the FAQ, the FAQ changed it completely.

[mmimzie]

Just now, deynon said:

 

unlucky it's not so, cause based on the FAQ you are summoning a new model otherways you'd no pay for it again. Your argument is not wrong and it's the argument used before the FAQ, the FAQ changed it completely.

No because it says a new unit or to replace a unit that has been destroyed. In this case replace means "put (something) back in a previous place or position." (taken from the dictionary), and position here meaning "a situation or set of circumstances, especially one that affects one's power to act." As such it being returned to the position as a model that is a alive in your army. Coming with it the status of general.

It is the literally meaning of all rules involved. It is literally RAW. Note  again general status is not conferred to units it on a per model bases. 

[deynon]

7 minutes ago, mmimzie said:

No because it says a new unit or to replace a unit that has been destroyed. In this case replace means "put (something) back in a previous place or position." (taken from the dictionary), and position here meaning "a situation or set of circumstances, especially one that affects one's power to act." As such it being returned to the position as a model that is a alive in your army. Coming with it the status of general.

It is the literally meaning of all rules involved. It is literally RAW. Note  again general status is not conferred to units it on a per model bases. 

If it's to put back i should not pay again as the rukes for each other istuation like so. But the FAQ change it. I have to pay to use it so it's a new model, so it can't be the eneral.

I agre with your analysis, a pity that FAQ crush it, unjustily but it's so. Cause you pay a new model it can't be the general. It's a silly FAQ but these are also it's conseguences.

As I written before, imagine the case about Vlad that as a ring with a similar effect and should pay too, you òay a new Vlad, even if it's a unique one still can't be the general anymore

[mmimzie]

We can simply agree to disagree.

 

As it stands you can make a new unit using old models, you can bring your unit back via summoning. Generalship is placed on a model and there are instances where they can come back to life.

 

A unit of zombies with one member set up as general can come back when the banner is used to revive slain models.

 

When using the summon zombie ability, as long as its the same guy you can summon him back to the field along with his friends. While the unit itself is new its contents are still the same. 

 

In the case of the ring it goes out of its way to make triple sure you know its the same model. As such it is still the model you said was your general, and still has a command trait which you've picked out. 

 

For kill points purposes each life of the summoned general is a units worth of kill points as it has been appart of two vampire lord units.

So as long as you use the same model it will always be your general. That said you can'y make your Vampire lord your general then summon a carirn wraith and use the same model and claim it's your general, as a cairn wraith unit is a cairn wraith not a vampire lord.

 

Edit: to me the whole ring thing is simply a case of people applying logic from other game systems to this game system. Very similar to the forest and how you can place your model, thing. I feel the rules are quite clear on how this works. 

[Thomas Lyons]

3 hours ago, deynon said:

If it's to put back i should not pay again as the rukes for each other istuation like so. But the FAQ change it. I have to pay to use it so it's a new model, so it can't be the eneral.

I agre with your analysis, a pity that FAQ crush it, unjustily but it's so. Cause you pay a new model it can't be the general. It's a silly FAQ but these are also it's conseguences.

As I written before, imagine the case about Vlad that as a ring with a similar effect and should pay too, you òay a new Vlad, even if it's a unique one still can't be the general anymore

Actually, you're wrong.  You aren't reading the original text.  

The requirement to pay for a unit is triggered in one of two ways: either new units are added to the army or units that are destroyed are being replaced.  Everyone has always focused on the first clause and ignored the second until Ben and other folks pointed out the second clause.  If you put a unit back on the table after having been killed, you have to pay for that unit again.  This isn't a new model or new unit.  It is the same one, and you have to pay points for it, as per the first couple sentences of the Reinforcement Point section.  All this FAQ did was highlight that this second clause was in play when items and abilities restored units.  It has always been this way; people were simply playing it wrong.

[deynon]

4 minutes ago, Thomas Lyons said:

Actually, you're wrong.  You aren't reading the original text.  

The requirement to pay for a unit is triggered in one of two ways: either new units are added to the army or units that are destroyed are being replaced.  Everyone has always focused on the first clause and ignored the second until Ben and other folks pointed out the second clause.  If you put a unit back on the table after having been killed, you have to pay for that unit again.  This isn't a new model or new unit.  It is the same one, and you have to pay points for it, as per the first sentence of the Reinforcement Point section.  All this FAQ did was highlight that this second clause was in play when items and abilities restored units.  It has always been this way; people were simply playing it wrong.

i don't think so. A unit can be replaced without being the same unit utself. ie when you summon back a unit as reinforcement whe  one is destroyed. It's not the same unit, but a replacement.

A replacement is not that unit that come back, but a unit that substitute. It's a replacement not a recovering or similar. You can replace soneone at work but you're mot him. The model can be the same but doesn't mean it's itself.

[mmimzie]

3 hours ago, deynon said:

i don't think so. A unit can be replaced without being the same unit utself. ie when you summon back a unit as reinforcement whe  one is destroyed. It's not the same unit, but a replacement.

A replacement is not that unit that come back, but a unit that substitute. It's a replacement not a recovering or similar. You can replace soneone at work but you're mot him. The model can be the same but doesn't mean it's itself.

Its not replacement. Its replace means "to put something or someonee back in its previous place or position" this is both in the physical and status since of the word. So by bring the same thing back you are replacing it. Or break ling up the word for dramqtic effect Re-placing the model.

[deynon]

1 minute ago, mmimzie said:

Its not replacement. Its replace means "to put something or someonee back in its previous place or position" this is both in the physical and status since of the word. So by bring the same thing back you are replacing it. Or break ling up the word for dramqtic effect Re-placing the model.

nope, that is restoration, not replacement

[mmimzie]

the wording is replace and the defintion is literally number 3 in this dictionary http://www.dictionary.com/browse/replace?s=t 

heck number 1 also works for how the rule works as i have discribed.

 

 

and number 2 in this one https://www.google.com/search?q=replace&oq=replace&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.1088j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

literally it's the meaning of the word?/ i simply.. i jsut don't understand what your trying to say here?? i simply dont understand??

[deynon]

Always about the ring.

How much point does it give when slain?

Cause in the rules about matched play it talkes about each unit destroyed during the game, but it came back. So it count as destroyed? In the case it is not how many points does it value? 

If it's not the same you pay each time is destroyed so no problem.

But if it's the same (es. count as general) you give points only when slain the second time? How many: they points itself or the sum of both the times?

[Nico]

Quote

It's worded totally different, and is an awful item since it doesn't get you away from what is killing you. Typically with the Seed of Rebirth, you take your last wound then another unit within 3" piles in and finishes you off. 

I took the recent FAQ answer to be confined to the Ring and the Ring only - it's a balance change. You could probably extend that purposively to Vlad (as that's the prototype for the Ring)..

If they wanted to make a global change/clarification, then they could have done so.

I agree that the Sylvaneth Seed is worded oddly and am still thinking about it. Given that damage is only allocated after a unit has done all of its attacks (this is widely forgotten about for the sake of conveniently recording the number of casualties and speeding up play, but is really important), we need to think about whether (a) after all those attacks from one unit are done the model loses its last wound (the rest of the damage is wasted - the overkill); and then the Seed kicks in and gives D3 wounds back (so it always survives at least one unit attacking it, or (b) whether it simply adds on D3 wounds which the damage from the one unit may chew through so it may die nevertheless.

Option (b) would make it poor as an artefact and unnecessarily complicated - it's effectively just adding D3 wounds to the profile with D3 being known later than the comparable command trait(s) which gives you +1 wound at the start of the game). 

There are still other FAQ answers re Skarbrand etc.. which point towards these abilities not using reinforcement points when the same model comes back. Ultimately - it's not very clear given the above discussion.

Death players should simply ignore the existence of the Ring - it is a very poor option now compared to the Cursed Book and the Sword. Giving the Ring to a Tomb Herald standing next to Settra sounds decent, but for the same cost, you could surely put two Tomb Heralds next to Settra and bring back extra models 2 banners to use before the first one dies (notwithstanding that the Tomb Heralds rightly cannot infinite bounce wounds between themselves - hopefully that dismal combo never found its way onto the table). 

It was by no means a no-brainer choice before the FAQ either given how good the Cursed Book is (cf Battlebrew and Talisman of Protection which are no brainers). 

Also I'd suggest avoiding tournaments with mandatory rolling (unless you think that it will hurt the Battlebrew addicts even more than it hurts Death). Given that you'll only have a 1 in 6 chance of the 5+ Ward save (which is the core of the army now), there's very little point playing Death competitively in those events. You might as well rock up with Nagash or other Deathlords and just YOLO it and see what happens for a bit of fun (since that way you don't lose out from the loss of a command trait as much).

[mmimzie]

As an errata is a change and an faq is a rule clarification. I'd say it effects all other similar worded stuff. Further proof of it being game wide and not faction only is that the FAQ is in the general hand book FAQ, and not in the faction specific FAQ. Where as Chaos has a rules change in its faction specific FAQ. 

Simply put being slain is your unit being destroyed. Pheonix and Skarr's rules both state that the model is slain, and then comes back. This falls unders defintions 1, 3, and 4 of what replace means http://www.dictionary.com/browse/replace?s=t . It's implications are one that it can be the same thing die and coming back as the same thing (read my explanations above), and 2 that you have to pay to use these abilities.

The whole reason people decided the rule worked this way was people assume it to be more balanced that way. We should interpret rules based on balance assumptions. This is a hyper silly thing to do. We should go by what is written and quite plainly stated.

Also i don't see a skarbrand FAQ that points to these not using reinforcement points.

 

Edit: imply put for those rules for all rules purposed your model has been slain as the result of your model being slain has not be undone. If i kill your pheonis, Skarr, or ring bearer on a pieace of power object for instance with my hero, i now claim that objective as you have been slain period. I also claim kill points as you have been slain. I don't remember the seed wording because i don't on thier rule book, but i do believe with that you aren't slain and you'd continue to take wounds after getting d3. 

 

the only thing that does not need reinforcement points is the hellpit abomination as it is never slain if it rules goes off because it says as much.

[deynon]

2 hours ago, mmimzie said:

As an errata is a change and an faq is a rule clarification. I'd say it effects all other similar worded stuff. Further proof of it being game wide and not faction only is that the FAQ is in the general hand book FAQ, and not in the faction specific FAQ. Where as Chaos has a rules change in its faction specific FAQ. 

Simply put being slain is your unit being destroyed. Pheonix and Skarr's rules both state that the model is slain, and then comes back. This falls unders defintions 1, 3, and 4 of what replace means http://www.dictionary.com/browse/replace?s=t . It's implications are one that it can be the same thing die and coming back as the same thing (read my explanations above), and 2 that you have to pay to use these abilities.

The whole reason people decided the rule worked this way was people assume it to be more balanced that way. We should interpret rules based on balance assumptions. This is a hyper silly thing to do. We should go by what is written and quite plainly stated.

Also i don't see a skarbrand FAQ that points to these not using reinforcement points.

 

Edit: imply put for those rules for all rules purposed your model has been slain as the result of your model being slain has not be undone. If i kill your pheonis, Skarr, or ring bearer on a pieace of power object for instance with my hero, i now claim that objective as you have been slain period. I also claim kill points as you have been slain. I don't remember the seed wording because i don't on thier rule book, but i do believe with that you aren't slain and you'd continue to take wounds after getting d3. 

 

the only thing that does not need reinforcement points is the hellpit abomination as it is never slain if it rules goes off because it says as much.

I don't care about "blancing". Who decide what's balanced?

I too often heard things modified to be balanced only to create other weights around elsewhere. 
It's not about balancing, but applying the rules.