RatOfGod
-
Posts
23 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by RatOfGod
-
-
13 minutes ago, 123lac said:
Cringe.
Models are as old as their sculpts.
No need to be dishonest.
But why does the age of the sculpt matter in itself? Are you honestly just rejecting the kits based on when they were modelled? It's hardly 'dishonest' to suggest that someone can make an independent aesthetic judgement on the quality of the minis...
-
3
-
-
11 minutes ago, Verengard said:
what counts is the end result which is far from what was expeced, sadly.
I’m afraid that’s more of a problem of certain players building up their own baseless expectations, rather than on the part of GW themselves. I certainly wouldn’t have put money on new sculpts or terrain; endless spells were more viable, but i’m not sad to see us without any uniques. If Skaven only got one new mini, in a limited run box, despite frankly outrageous options like metal acolytes still existing as battleline, it seems bizarre to expect much more for CoS. The two Start Collecting! options came as a nice surprise.
-
Perhaps this isn't a faction for you then, and that's fine. There's no need for everything to appeal to everybody. This is GW extending an olive branch to those of us who still hold a particular fondness for our nostalgic, low fantasy WHFB factions, and I'm personally over the moon to be able to get my grumbling, traditional, bearded dwarfs and my frilly-sleeved, moustachioed, cod-piece wearing humans back on the table.
-
9
-
1
-
-
On 9/24/2018 at 11:49 AM, deumosd said:
I was wondering if more experienced people could please take a look at my first ever attempt at kitbash/ conversion/ using green stuff. I have tried to make some acolytes.
would these be excepted in a GW tournament or not? I have entered my first ever at the end of November. If they will not be excepted I had better buy the actual models. Thanks in advance!
Looking good! My only suggestion to maybe neaten it up a bit would be to forgo using the whole left arm in the conversion; perhaps try cutting the hand which you're using to hold the orb at the wrist and graft it onto an original plague monk arm, cutting off the plague monk hand obviously. Then you won't have to try to green-stuff an awkward shoulder joint or deal with mismatching arms between the two sides. It might be worth looking for some glass beads too to use maybe as the orbs instead of greenstuff balls? Green stuff is great when you need to sculpt things from scratch, but when all you want is a sphere you might as well go with a perfectly round one to start with rather than trying to mould it.
-
16 hours ago, Kugane said:
A box set of 10 or so of new gutter runners, acolytes and plague monks is all we need i think. I wouldnt even mind if it were all on the same sprues.
Add to that list night runners (seriously, they still use the old monkey-arm clanrat set as their base), maybe a new rattling gun, jezzail, and plague censer bearer sculpt, and blister packs for the island of blood (and thus oop) warlock engineer, poison wind mortar, warpfire thrower, and pack master and we might be in business. That's if they go down the 'update old sets' route rather than something new altogether as they've done with the dwarf and elf factions.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Tasman said:
Well, in most cases Nurgle doesn't have to 'ally' pestilens as they have the Nurgle keyword. If I'm running a straight Nurgle list I can take Pestilens and keep the Nurgle alliance. I just can't use monks for battleline for example. For the record, the war scroll builder on the community site will let me give Nurgle Traits, artifacts and spells to a verminlord. Because he's Nurgle alliance. Also pestilens. Depends on what you're trying to build. Eventually this is all going to get ironed out, but now that I've thought about it, bringing a pestilens battalion under a Nurgle ALLIANCE is not 'legal' for matched play.
Precisely, that's what I was trying to articulate on the previous page. On the issue of the Corruptor, Warscroll builder specifically lets you give him those things because he is a NURGLE DAEMON so has access to their spell lore etc., but not SKAVEN so he can't be skitterleaped by a Verminlord Deceiver, for instance, which they've FAQ'd previously. The question here only pertains to Battalions and the point at which its content become allies, regardless of their shared keywords. It honestly feels like they need some more clearly worded, holistic rule on battalions to tie up all the loose ends at this point, given how many corner cases seem to have emerged from past inconsistencies on what exactly a battalion entails and its allegiance status.
-
I'm really confused as to why a rule printed in a battletome would somehow take priority over a general FAQ which postdates it. There is no room for exceptions in the FAQ as it stands, such as 'the battalion belongs to the battletome's faction or any allegiance which all of its units share'. It specifically outlines how the allegiance is determined and what restrictions arise from that allegiance.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Turragor said:
Not so odd given the fluff, Nurgle isn't fond of the Horned Rat.
Well, except that the fluff also has a long history of the collaboration between Nurgle and Pestilens all the way back to Lustria in the old world and continued in the early AOS campaign story. Allegiances of convenience are hardly uncommon in the lore. In any case, if it was lore-driven it would doubly strange that Pestilens could still take Nurgle as allies - that is, Nurgle choosing to support a Pestilens force rather than vice versa. I primarily meant that it's an odd situation now, and one which wouldn't have appeared previously under the old battalion rules, in which you can take all of the individual units quite happily within the Nurgle force but can't even theoretically take the battalion in a 4k+ point list or whatever you'd need on home rules for the allies quota.
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, 5kaven5lave said:
As far as I know, Warscroll Batallions from other Battletomes can be used legally BUT the Batallion itself and all the units in it count as allies, so the answer is basically no in a 2k.
14 hours ago, Euphanism said:So Pestilen's are legal in a Nurgle army without being allies (because they have the Nurgle keyword), but when they become part of a battalion they have to count as allies?
No wonder my group was confused. ?♂️
9 hours ago, kenshin620 said:Yes, sadly I think GW's reasoning is this
"If Battalion is found on Allegiance X, no matter what it is Allegiance X even if its units are also 100% part of Allegiance Y".
Nighthaunt are another example. Many Nighthaunt units are 100% normal units for Legions of Nagash, but their battalions are Nighthaunt and thus eats into ally points. This was put specifically in the LoN FAQ.
Unfortunately, this means that Foulrain cannot be taken in Nurgle under *any circumstances*, regardless of the theoretical max points of the game, because Nurgle oddly cannot take clan Pestilens as allies. As we already know (@sal4m4nd3r) from previous discussions on PTW, GW's new ruling on battalions is unequivocal: the allegiance of a Battalion is determined by the faction listed under its title, and where none is listed then the battletome it is found in. If that is different from the allegiance of the army you are taking, then the battalion cost itself and the cost of all the units contained within it counts against your allied units quota.
Now, Nurgle's possible allies are Brayherds, Chaos Gargants, Everchosen, Khorne, Monsters of Chaos, Slaanesh, Slaves to Darkness [excluding those marked with Tzeentch], and Warherds. There is no clan pestilens on this list. Since Foulrain is a Pestilens battalion, it and its units count as allies, and since Nurgle cannot take pestilens as allies, the battalion is a no-go I'm afraid.
-
4 minutes ago, Umjammerlama said:
I think he means 3 units of plague censer bearers.
That would make sense if they're run at min unit sizes of 5, for 180 points total; good spot. The point about costing for units, artefacts, realm, total points value, general, etc. still stands of course and would have probably eliminated the confusion here too.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Britzkrieg13 said:
Ok so I've been working on my line up for my army and here is what I got from using a war scroll builder.
1 Verminlord Corruptor2 plague furnaces
1 plague priest with warpstone tipped staff
3 units of 40 plague monks
3 units of plague bearers
1 rattling gun weapon team
2 warpfire thrower weapon team
1 warp lightning cannon
and 2 endless spells
soulsnare shackles
quicksilver swords
this is what i have planned so far for the final build of my army it is subject to change especially if anyone has any suggestions on how i can improve it
Without seeing the points breakdown, which allegiance your list takes, which models are allies etc. it's a bit hard to give any real feedback at the moment. I'm assuming that you plan to run this as GA Chaos with the Plaguebearers as your battleline? It can't be Pestilens allegiance because the Skryre units alone fill your 400 point quota for allies, leaving no space for the Plaguebearers, and can't be Nurgle either because they don't have the option to take Skryre as an ally? That being said, it looks as though you're going to exceed 2k points from this list in any case. The Pestilens things alone come to 1380 points, with the Skryre units it's up to 1820, and three min-size units of Plaguebearers is another 360 points on top?
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, Britzkrieg13 said:
This brings me to another question I have which is about the sword of judgment. I looked over the extra pieces from my verminlord but I could not find a sword anywhere. Which lead to to believe it must be a relic or something so I looked it up and all I could find were the stats for it but did not really say what is was. Also keeps sending me links to the Daughters of kaine for some reason.
The Sword of Judgement is a realm artefact and its rules are detailed in the Malign Sorceries expansion. You can say that your army is from a specific realm and take artefacts from that realm in your list - in this case, your army would need to be from Ulgu. It’s not a piece that’s included with the set - the Corruptor’s weapons are still the normal ones unless you choose to model the artefact onto it - it’s just like saying that your plague priest has the Liber Bubonicus of something from the Pestilens artefacts.
If you do choose to play your army as a Grand Alliance Skaven list, you won’t be able to use Plague Monks as a battleline option anymore of course as they are only battleline *if Pestilens allegiance*. So you’ll need to find space in your list for three generic Chaos battleline options for a legal 2k list, e.g. three blocks of 20 clanrats. There have been some examples of lists like this earlier in the thread.
-
1
-
-
57 minutes ago, peasant said:
So my first attempt on a plagueTouched Warband
Allegiance: Chaos - Mortal Realm: Ghyran
LEADERS
Lord of Plagues (140)
- General
- Command Trait : Malicious Conqueror - Artefact : GhyrstrikeWarscroll Builder on www.warhammer-community.com
Festus The Leechlord (140) Lord of Afflictions (220)
- Artefact : Wand of Restoration
UNITS
5 x Putrid Blightkings (160)
5 x Putrid Blightkings (160)
5 x Putrid Blightkings (160)
14 x Chaos Warriors (270) (to use that battalion trait with at least one unit!)
-Hand Weapon & Shield
5 x Chaos Warriors (90)
-Hand Weapon & Shield
BATTALIONS
Plaguetouched Warband (160)
TOTAL: 1500/1500
EXTRA COMMAND POINTS: 1
WOUNDS: 121
LEADERS: 3/4 BATTLELINES: 2 (2+) BEHEMOTHS: 0/2 ARTILLERY: 0/2 ARTEFACTS: 2/2 ALLIES: 0/200
Doesn't a Plaguetouched Warband list need a general and then seven additional mortal nurgle units, i.e., 1+7? At the moment your list only has 1+6 units.
Edit: IGNORE - I didn't see that you'd written Festus and the LOA on the same line in the list.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Lord_Skrolk said:
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that's not true. GW clarified that Pestilens battalions are only for Pestilens allegiance.
The FAQ about battalions relates specifically to instances in which you take one faction allegiance (say, Nurgle) and attempt to include a battalion from an allied faction (such as the Plaguetouched Warband from Everchosen), in which instance both the battalion itself and all of its included units count against your allied quota. This is a grand alliance chaos list, and hence there is no meaningful distinction that can be made between 'allied' and native 'faction' units; every possible battalion in Chaos is fair game.
-
2
-
-
14 minutes ago, Kirjava13 said:
Wait-wait, the Arch-Warlock can cast two spells?!? Aarrgghh I have been a fool-idiot!
The warscroll is fairly explicit about it - 'An Arch-warlock is a wizard. He can attempt to cast two different spells in each of your hero phases'.
-
30 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:
Hi, isn’t it still possible to increase the damage from an attack, that those d6 or 6 additional hits, which all wound, each by 1?
In that case you would not, as the rules state, be adding '1 to the damage inflicted by 1 successful attack' but instead be adding 6 to the damage of the successful attack.
I hasten to add that this isn't really a further nerf to Skryre but rather them clarifying the wording of the original rule from the GHB2018 - I already suggested that this was how the rule should be interpreted on the first page of this thread and it seems now even more clear that their intention is to award the increase *by a single point of damage* the output of one weapon on one model. Trying to game the rule and increase that to six isn't going to fly at a tournament or endear yourself to your opponent.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, angrycontra said:
It says "increase damage characteristic of the WEAPON by 1" weapon implies the entire weapon for that model which in turn would mean that all attacks benefit from that damage increase since all attacks happen at the same time.
You might be right there, apologies. I think what threw me is the function of the whole ‘a successful attack’ clause in it. Reading it your way, that section just means that you can’t add 1 to an attack by a weapon which dealt 0 damage, converting a failed attack into successful one. It would’ve helped for them to have written that more clearly in a second sentence, or just clarify that ‘For one weapon which has made a successful attack during the battle round, you may double its damage characteristic’.
-
5 minutes ago, angrycontra said:
Add 1 to the damage characteristic of a weapon used by a friendly skyre model that has made a successful attack.
I honestly struggle to read this as being a permanent effect in any way. I'm also a little unsure in what sense you read this as having an effect on 'all successful attacks by that model'. If the rattling cannons do 3d6 attacks at one damage each, then as per the core rules a successful attack is one wound roll for which the corresponding save has been failed. It goes on, in the core rules, to then describe how 'each successful attack inflicts damage on the target unit' and so on.
Per the wording you've quoted from the GHB, then, it stands to reason that after rolling your 3d6 attacks on the rattling cannons, for instance, and working out how many wounds should be allocated, you then double the damage characteristic of 'a successful attack'. That is, if one successful attack deals one damage, you double it, only adding one to the total wounds allocated. It specifically does *not* say that you 'add 1 to the damage characteristic [...] for each successful attack'. And further still, if it specifies 'a successful attack', then it certainly doesn't imply 'each successful attack that the model makes for the remainder of the game'.
-
2 hours ago, sorokyl said:
But why do they even have a target on their back? The general gets no benefits really, other than a command trait? and if they die you pick a new general with a new command trait.
I was thinking, If they don't change Archaon's wording to force him to be the general, you could see Archaon being led by a Harbinger of decay or something just so that you get an extra command trait...
The whole ‘my general died so I get to nominate a new one’ thing is only allowed in open play by the way. There’s no such rule for matched play.
-
It absolutely has to be just a mistake in copying across either the old max-size unit discount to the new table, or an erroneous reduction in the unit size to 30 instead of 40. As it stands, a block of 30 stormvermin would cost 80 points more than three blocks of 10 would. I'd anticipate it getting reduced to 400, although even then it seems a bit strange for 2018 GW to make a max unit size of 30 for something which they only sell in batches of 20.
-
Any thoughts on the bizarre 30-point increase in cost of Congregation of Filth to 170? It seems strange given the 10-20 point reductions on every other Pestilens Battalion and most units. We're never going to be a very low-drop list at 2k points, so it's a question of whether the 1 command point from the battalion + its utility and extra artefact are worth the opportunity cost of THREE command points with a spare twenty-points to go towards an endless spell.
Does CoS need new models?
in Cities of Sigmar
Posted
Precisely. I do think that it’s the overhaul from WHFB to AoS that is influencing people’s opinions on these sculpts much more than the detail themselves. Have you ever seen anybody in 40k complain that the Valkyrie should be squatted because the kit is a decade old at this point?