[AoS 2 - Daughters of Khaine Discussion]

Not to mention how the Gaze of Morathi can help contribute to splitting up a unit, thus resulting in an opportunity to take out half a unit in the right circumstances given the new split unit rules. 

[AoS 2 - Daughters of Khaine Discussion]

8 hours ago, swarmofseals said:

The Iron Heart of Khaine:

"...cannot be healed, but no more than 3 wounds can be allocated to her in any one turn. Any additional wounds and/or mortal wounds allocated to her in the same turn are negated"

Fanatical Faith:

"Roll a dice each time a wound or mortal wound is allocated to a friendly Daughters of Khaine model. On a 6+ the wound is ignored."

I might be wrong about this, but my impression is that most people read the first rule as basically "Morathi can't suffer more than 3 wounds in a turn." The way the rule is actually worded, however, is that any wounds that are allocated to Morathi beyond the first three are automatically negated. Fanatical Faith kicks in after the wound is allocated. Based on a strict rules-as-written interpretation, then Morathi should only ever be allocated 3 wounds in a single turn regardless of whether those wounds end up being negated by Fanatical Faith (or any other method that occurs after the wound is allocated. 

If GW does in fact intend to have the rule work in the way that most people think, then either Iron Heart of Khaine should be reworded to say "can suffer no more than 3 wounds" or something similar OR Fanatical Faith should be reworded to say "Roll a dice each time a wound or mortal wound would be allocated ... On a 6+ the wound is negated rather than allocated."

If GW actually intends the strict rules-as-written interpretation, then that is a bit of a game changer and makes Morathi (particularly Shadow Queen) MUCH more powerful. 

Sorry, but this interpretation is incorrect. Per the Designer's Commentary for June, 2018:

Q: If a wound or mortal wound is allocated to Morathi and then negated, does it still count as one of the maximum of 3 wounds and/or mortal wounds that can be allocated to her that turn?

A: No. When a wound is negated, it no longer counts as having been allocated to a model.

[AoS 2 - Daughters of Khaine Discussion]

I've been following the old DoK thread for a long while and although I was initially driven to collect Nighthaunt as my first foray into AoS, I've been constantly thinking about doing a DoK army. I decided to take the plunge today, but I see that there are a lot of units temporarily out of stock on the GW site. 

Is this a dark omen, an influx of new DoK players, or a sign at a boxed set incoming?

[AoS 2 - Daughters of Khaine Discussion]

1 hour ago, DJMoose said:

 I've been considering allying in a Sorceress not only for extra spell potential, but also for Word of Pain, as -1 to hit is huge when many Nighthaunt inflict mortal wounds on 6s.

Just note that many of the Nighthaunt's new models with Frightful Touch carry the wording "unmodified hit roll of 6". That would mean -1 to hit won't impact the MW generation of the army, though likewise +1 to hit won't help boost it either.

[AoS 2 - Nighthaunt Discussion]

36 minutes ago, Keldaur said:

And to stack up bonuses.  But to be honest, people really undervalue rerolling charges, or getting auto 6s to run. 

Oh, I agree. I think those are really powerful. They're just not super neat NH specific command shenanigans lol

[AoS 2 - Nighthaunt Discussion]

33 minutes ago, Malakithe said:

He might not get his warscroll changed. The new ghost moms CA also says she must be the general. They might not change the 'needs to be general' part but I hope they change the other part if everything is going to unmodified rolls

If they don't change the "needs to be a general" part for this unit, then there's only the mounted KoS with a command ability that doesn't need them to be the general, right? Am I missing something here - why would NH want more than the normal 1 per turn command point? For the normal command abilities every army gets?

 

[AoS 2 - Nighthaunt Discussion]

2 minutes ago, kenshin620 said:

Well might want to wait for matched play points.

I thought we already had that? 240 was what I remember seeing.

[AoS 2 - Nighthaunt Discussion]

4 hours ago, Ungface said:

I think people missed out on the fact that the original interview in the NH focus where it talked about frightful touch was talking about how NH was THEN not with the new units.

As a prospective new AoS player, that concerns me a little bit - why write an article one day specifically addressing the new edition, then retcon the info a month later in an article that implied it continued, not superseded the original text? Starts to feel like whiplash. It makes me wonder if I should expect big thematic shifts like this to whole factions often. Will it happen again in the BT?

Certainly makes me question the relevance of the faction focus articles now, which until now I had thought were fantastic gateways. It the information within is incorrect, then I'm back at square one, looking in from outside wondering how not to waste my money lol

[The Rumour Thread]

45 minutes ago, Double Misfire said:

The Celestant Prime's a named character. Doesn't have a name  

Ah, don't remember them saying that was a named character. 

[The Rumour Thread]

1 hour ago, Bloodmaster said:

where on gods green earth does the headgear of the artwork looks anything like the Kehmrian mask, shown above?! seriously, guys, all things shown point to a von Carstein inspired aesthetic and Isabella. But tbh at this point I realy hope, she won't have a name besides the title and the hinds of a decedent with a tragic love story, simply to see both sides, including me,  being wrong.

Well, she kind of has to have a name - alongside the Craven King reveal, the other two models that were teased with the silhouettes were confirmed to be named characters in the UK Games Expo warcom post. 

Definitely hoping for Isabella myself. 

[The Rumour Thread]

5 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

I'm not even convinced the Mortarch of Grief will have a name - just lots of hints of who it could be.  Could be wrong as it would hamper the back story writing a bit though  

Well, here's the thing - the reason we think the Mortarch will have a name is because it was announced that it would, but that's working on the assumption that either of the silhouettes shown alongside Kurdoss Valentian, the Craven King, are the Mortarch.