Jump to content

Ahn-ket

Members
  • Posts

    294
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Ahn-ket

  1. 1 hour ago, Beastmaster said:

    Put him on a rock, give him a pot and some slaughter table maybe. That should fill the large base, which in turn should make him imposing enough to be a believable hero. 😊

    I have a second maw pot which I want to use for the Slaughtermaster but it's to big to be drawn by a normal gw ogor I might order an oger from sciborminiatures which looks bigger then a gw one

  2. 14 minutes ago, DestructionKev said:

    I used a normal Glutton and some bits from a Beastclaw starterbox for mine: 

     

     

    Screenshot_20200212-101012_Gallery.jpg

    Nice 

    Have used a normal ogor myself yet

    Pic follow 

    Now I searching for a third party oger which is bigger then gw's for self made Slaughtermaster 

    • Thanks 1
  3. 16 hours ago, Kugane said:

    The ogors of blood bowl are great if you have some glutton bits leftover. 2 of the running ones are pretty much useless, but you will have a lot of spare gnoblars :)

    Nice idea may try a box

    • Like 1
  4. 16 hours ago, DestructionFranz said:

    It would be nice to use the female Meneater, the one with rolling pin on her shoulder. 🙂

    Maneaters are out they look nice but I don't like finecast that's the reason I want suggestions for a basemodell to start with 

     

  5. 48 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

    Da wohne ich doch noch etwas zu weit weg (nähe Singen) ^^

    Wie dem auch sei: Wir suchen noch Mitspieler für eine Map-Kampagne, die wir nächsten Monat spielen. Man muss nicht vor Ort sein um zu zocken, es genügt sich an die Szenario Regeln zu halten und mit einer anderen Person zu spielen, die auch teilnimmt (und eben auch die richtige Fraktion spielt für die Schlacht). Ergebnisse werden dann an mich weitergeleitet und auf der Karte notiert :)

    Schick mir mal nähere Informationen darüber vielleicht mag der ein oder andere aus meiner Gegend mit machen

  6. 23 hours ago, JPjr said:

    As I understand it, so other views are available but...

    1. If you go for a Grand Alliance as your allegiance then yes you can use any units with that Keyword with no restriction amongst to points or listed alliances (there may be some very specific examples which explicitly don't allow it, but I can't think of any off the top of my head and if they were it would say). And so yes in. GA:Order army you could have Sylvaneth and DoK fighting bark to chainmail bikini.

    2. Probably, certain people will find any excuse to act like dicks. Personally I like to create nice fluffy armies with vastly convoluted back stories that ties everything up with a nice bow, but no one else is under that obligation. If it's a match play/pitched battle and it's legal in the rules then they can play it. 

    3. With Open/Narrative games then in theory no. Of course a lot of people who play what they would happily describe as Narrative games use points and will generally speaking go by the matched play army composition rules, just because generally speaking they have been thematically chosen and works with what you have in mind and means you just build one army to play across all forms of the game.

    Setting up these kind of games actually requires more nuance and discussion between players before playing, and people might create their own impositions and the like to suit the kind of game they have in mind but the heart, for me, of narrative games is telling a story and that means things like army composition, whether that's the specific units you can pick, allegiances etc can be ignored/edited in any way that helps you tell that story.

    4. Certainly in matched play they are. But again in Narrative or Open you're using the tools the game gives you to create the kind of game you want to play. Maybe you want to recreate a battle where Vampires and Stormcast make a desperate last stand together against a larger chaos force, it's totally lore friendly and has happened in several stories.

    Now again your only restriction is what you agree to beforehand, of course if that's how you're playing then there's a pretty good chance that the story your game is telling is as important to you as the result. So in that case I would imagine for the sake of telling ap articular story or enacting a certain battle most people would find reasonable reasons why Order/Death/Destruction might on occasion team up, and perhaps when Chaos might just in an edge case ally with a Destruction horde. 

    5. Sadly I think she's homeless except for in a GA: Order army, there's a few units/models like this that have originated in sidegames and have for various reasons been left a bit high & dry (Sepulchral Guard was another example).

     

     

    Sepulchral guard are no longer left a bit & dry they are now part of LoN (legions of nagash armies)

  7. On 7/19/2019 at 11:27 PM, Neck-Romantic said:

    Anyone else wondering if the Myrmourn warband may have been postponed in order to apply it to Warcry instead?

    No because they are for the smaller/easier Version of underworlds

    And No they aren't part of wacry cause GW tells which models in the different non chaos bands

     

  8. If it was a matter of not being able to get the model for GoS with mortality glass gw has to remove the legion black coach too because the old coach model isn't buyable anymore ( for using the nighthaunt one as Legion Coach you need Agreement from your opponent and a different base)

  9. 8 minutes ago, Tropical Ghost General said:

    So RIP Mortality Glass Guardian of Souls. Your lantern may have only burned for a short time but it burned twice as bright 😢

    IMG_20190708_191709.jpg

    Maybe we should tell it to gw that he should be in the ghb19 

  10. 39 minutes ago, Charlo said:

    Everyone reckons that Nagash will be FAQ'd out of the LoG fairly soon, as to fit with the other LoX rules.

    If that will be the case they should allow LoG to take the LoN spell lores and double spell rule and give LoG three more own spells and artefacts

  11. 3 hours ago, Coyote said:

    Hello - just want to clarify the order in which the table for matched play? 

    (Please confirm or correct)

    - Choose scenario

    - Place objectives (if appropriate)

    - Players alternate each placing 5 (optional Random) terrain - total 10 (Key -whatever they agree to)

    - Roll sides 

    - Army specific terrain is placed (if applicable)

    - THEN Roll to see who goes first

    - My Skaven then win

    This part is fixed in matched play

    - Players alternate each placing 5 (optional Random) terrain - total 10 (Key -whatever they agree to)

    6 big ones 4 small ones

  12. 3 minutes ago, Heliums said:

    That raises a good point. What happens if all 10 pieces the players pick can't be placed? I didn't catch any ruling on that except for faction terrain. Do the other pieces just not get placed? Two mausoleums set up like that will probably mean no other terrain can fit. It's gamey and abusive but seems legal, so you can bet people will probably do it if they think they can use it to their advantage. But maybe setting terrain up like this isn't to anyone advantage and no one will bother. 

     

    The ruling said you must take 3 big and 2 small ones per player and Set it on table thats the point of the 10x10 or 6x6 rule and my thinking that it applies to all terrains

×
×
  • Create New...