Luke1705
-
Posts
374 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Everything posted by Luke1705
-
You right. Brain f a r t. Just in general I wouldn’t rely too much on mortal wound output at range from skyfires now that they don’t work on 5 and 6 even if you give them +1 to hit (from the shaman for example). And -1 rend d3 damage, while good, is something the tree people are generally good at avoiding with their high base armor save for the most part.
-
Skyfires are going to struggle to see through the trees just like your spells do. Gotta get in there and tango with the skyfires in close combat or enlightened. The tricky thing about Sylvaneth is that you can block their forest placement if you’re careful. It’s only 18” range on their spell and they can’t put the forests within 1” of your models or any terrain features, and any of the up to 3 forests have to be placed within 1” of each other. So you can kind of have an idea of where he might be able to place a forest. Additionally, when they travel to their forests, they can’t be within 9” of you, but they need to be within 3” of a wyldwood. TLDR: keep a model within 6” of all edges of a wood and they can’t travel to it. Smartly block areas of the board where you don’t want them to put new woods.
-
I'm not sure I agree with that. Having the ability to kill support characters is so important. Sure spells can do that, but most support characters can just hang back and stay outside of casting range, or they can at least do so until their front lines have hit yours. Skyfires give you the ability to kill the characters on your very first turn. Or I guess I should clarify - they're probably only killing 1 support character per turn. But them getting to do what they do when they go first is pretty important IMO and very nice with fold reality. It's just so many attacks and those re-rolls are beautiful.
-
Of course that just makes sense. My (apparently erroneous) assumption was that the newest warscroll would be in the azyr app, and that the beasts of chaos skyfires would be the same as the tzeentch skyfires in the app. It’s not that new of a battletome any longer. GW gotta get that straightened out
-
They Azyr app updated it to be unmodified 6 but didn’t change the +1 to hit location? Smh. I just assumed that since they updated it to have an entry in the BOC section of the app that the entire warscroll was updated. Oh GW
-
Also why are there two special rules for the shaman? His warscroll says “visions of the future” which lets you add 1 to the hit rolls for skyfires, but skyfires have their own rule “preternatural enhancement” which lets them do the same thing. Does this mean that you get +2 to hit from a single shaman? I guess this would offset the fact that only unmodified 6 proc the mortal wounds now
-
Has anyone tried big units of skyfires and/or enlightened with Kairos to ensure you don’t get screwed on fold reality? It’s been a while since I’ve played tzeentch
-
I’m not sure what you’re arguing. Are you saying that the attack sequence ends as soon as you roll to wound, or that the attack sequence ends for skullreapers if they roll a 1 to wound? I’m assuming the latter since otherwise modifiers to wound could never exist if it were the former. If the latter, you would have to show rules support for why the attack sequence would end. Take the spirit hosts for example. They clearly denote that the attack sequence ends on a roll of 6 to hit. No such rule exists for the skullreapers. Your assumption is that the sequence ends because no save throw needs to be made. However, that is only because you do not wound on a 1+. This is possible (though unlikely) because unlike in the rules where it is stated that a hit roll of 1 always fails, no such rule exists for wound rolls (unless I missed something in the core rules)
-
Actually I think Darksteve is correct now. The roll itself is stil subject to modification. The rule would have to say “if you roll an unmodified 1” for it to be unstoppable. Interestingly, the reverse would also be true, where if they ever suffer -1 to wound, those mortals would proc on 1’s and 2’s
-
Isotop yes you are correct. Can’t stop a natural 1
-
I actually like bullgors. Sure you need some gors to be cheap screening units and objective holders, but bullgors hit nice and hard
-
You mean the khorne battalion? Yes it might be the best thing in that book.
-
If you are in combat with a shooting unit, they must target a unit that they are in combat with. It doesn't necessarily mean the *closest* unit, but for example if my unit of blood warriors is 5" away, and there is a unit of reavers 2" away, then they have to shoot the reavers.
-
I think I like Slaughterborn or deathdealer better for that guy. Slaughterborn lets you fish for more “6”, whatever actual number you’re looking for. Deathdealer is just a flat bump. Devastating blow is of course nice, but with rend -2 already they’re already saving on 5 or 6. Helps out against the grims certainly but with only 6ish attacks you’re getting 1 or 2 outrageous carnage rolls on average. I’ll have to do the math, but my suspicion is that it’s better only against ethereal units
-
For the record, I am also not convinced that the flowstone blade works like that. After more reading of the core rules on page 232, specifically the “making attacks” box, I think the +1 to wound only applies to the attack, or hit, that had a result of 6+, not to all of them, and thus you are unable to ever get more than +1 to wound out of the item. I think this because the rules refer to rolling through the attack sequence for each individual dice, not for many at once. It says you may roll many at once to save time, but this does not mean that the outcome of one roll can affect another roll. Quite the opposite, in fact
-
I’m not sure I see the distinction. Clearly you wouldn’t get to double the damage of all the grave guard in the unit time after time, but if a single grave guard model made multiple attacks, it should double the damage of all of that model’s attacks if we’re being consistent, correct? Or am I missing something? Also Dan I know you’ve played a lot of Khorne at a fair few big events. Have you been to large events that have ruled that the flowstone item works this way? And as a secondary question, have you found this to be a game-breaking mechanic? Being able to pump out 20 or 30 mortals to every unit in an 8” aoe just seems like there is very little counterplay outside of doing your best not to clump up units
-
Do you have a rules source for why the Flowstone Blade works to increase all of the wound rolls and not just the wound roll for the attack that rolled a 6 or more?
-
I’ve been seeing a couple people doing Council of Blood lists with 3 or 4 bloodthirsters, and that’s really all I’ve ever wanted in life. So what would you guys reccomend taking as the extra artefacts, assuming realm artefacts are in play? Im probably going to run it as a 2 drop, but I’m not sure which other battalion I’ll use. There are a few that are alluring. So I’ll likely have 3 artefacts to switch around.
-
I’m running 60 grims in a tournament, but under legions of Nagash. Makes them more durable of course but actually reduces their offensive output a touch since I don’t get the guardian’s to wound buff. They’re still rather stabby though. 2-1 after the first day and an impressively awful dice showing vs daughters. Like I didn’t cast hand of dust. At all. Not he guessed right. It just never cast
-
Yeah that’s similar to a list that did very well at a recent event called FaceHammer. Your list is good McDonald
-
How have people been finding the bladegheist revenants? I really like the fall back and charge, but I wonder if only 1” reach with 32mm bases has been tough to deal with
-
Oh and it being one drop was just in line with the idea that multiple units could teleport using the dreadwood ability. If the entire army is part of the battalion (and the rule works for all) then the whole army could redeploy if you were a one drop
-
See to be honest, I never even imagined that it would count as all of them until someone told me that people played Dreadwood that way and that’s why it was good. I said “no don’t be silly, that can’t be right. ‘A’ means one. Perhaps there is an FAQ that settles this” What I see the FAQ as is setting precedent. Why would they say that a means all for one formation and not intend to imply that this is the case for all formations (or at the very least, all Sylvaneth formations)? I can understand and appreciate people saying “hey until it’s explicit, I’m not going to play it like that”. And Sylvaneth is like my fourth next army project. Might be 3rd edition before I actually play them so it’s likely rather moot for me. But to me, this seems to have been answered. I’d be very curious to know how some larger events have played this (because I would be decently surprised if every event was in agreement one way other the other)
-
The relevant FAQ, from the Sylvaneth designer’s commentary. Though not mentioning this ability specifically, it clearly outlines what GW means when they say “a unit”
-
Yeah totally misread the +1/+2. Forgot that didn’t apply. That’s what happens when I theory-craft late at night! The number of units you can redeploy is the entire army though if you play it as a one drop. The FAQ is clear that an ability that says “a unit” like where it says “a dreadwood unit” in that redeploy ability actually means “any dreadwood unit(s)”. I assumed it meant 1 until I read the FAQ
