Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Tropical Ghost General

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

386 Celestant-Prime

About Tropical Ghost General

  • Rank
    Lord Castellant

Recent Profile Visitors

630 profile views
  1. Yes, but the trouble is that as he no longer knows the spells of other DEATH wizards, his usefulness isn't what it once was. Also for the points cost your almost better looking at one of the other two main mortarch, Neffy or Mannfred, as their warscroll abilities are good (either -1 to hit or re-rolls 1s to hit and wound), plus both are much better in a fight than Arkhan, and both are slightly cheaper in points.
  2. don't forget to add CoS and Nagash OBR to those magic doms, plus any order army that allies in kroak. And to an extent Khorne for shutting down weak/average casting. And then the fact that a lot of people will be using one of those armies in games, especially at events you'll expect to face one of those armies in probably 2 of the 4/5 games (more if you actually do well with the spooky bedsheets). The issue with the mourngul is it's durability. It can die in a turn very easily and the nerf to it's minus to hit (models within rather than units within) means that it needs to be in close to have any effect. Neffy is a solid choice, but the lack of a ward save on a 4+ hero with 11 wounds, is very risky. As all DEATH heroes have a ward save when taken in their allegiance, I don't understand why they don't have it when taken as an ally in another death army, I really wish they would, as it's hardly game breaking. To get more reliable minus to hit, replace geminids, shards and 3 SHS, for a unit of blood knights. Or my ultimate troll before GHB20, was Lord Ex in execution horde with miasmic blade/gryph-feather charm for minus to hit. Do 3 x 9SHs in the battalion to act as a body guard. Artefact made him -1 to hit. Battalion made him an additional -1 to hit. Look out Sir gave an additional -1 to shooting. Heroes were an additional -1 in combat due to warscroll ability. The Lord Ex was then -3 to hit in combat for heroes, -2 for standard units in combat. -3 to hit with shooting and had a 4+/5++ for mortals/6+++ward. Obviously the no ward save stacking reduces his survivability and the loss of the realm artefact reduces this as NH don't have a generic -1 to hit for both shooting and melee artefact. But I used to create the ultimate tarpit by having him as the general with RotSH for healing back the SH body guard. It's wasn't perfect as 5 wounds is still squishy but it was glorious to watch wave upon wave of dice rolls do nothing 😂
  3. The issue with any magic based lists is that unless you are one of the magic doms (Honest Wargamer term for super strong magic armies), it's pointless building a list based around buffs caused through magic spells going off. NH aren't alone in being one of the magic subs, so having magic is OK, but at the moment there is so little point in building a list around it, even Reik is not a reliability (especially if you get the 6+ ward save and negate the +3 to cast). Chatting to my lizard playing friend tonight about his list ideas and I honestly can't think of how to deal with any of it, other than use another army 😂
  4. Currently the ruling is any WD content published prior to the current GHB is no longer valid in matched play unless you get permission from your opponent beforehand. Wrath of the Everchosen is different, in that the rules inside are an expansion to the game (similar to FP). They haven't had a more recent publication of those rules that replace them, so they remain valid (even though they aren't specifically listed in the current GHB). And going forward, any WD content released now, as it's after the most recent GHB is valid for matched play if it has points, and they won't need consent from your opponent beforehand (unlike stuff like dolorous guard, RIP). GW could really help their player base by using terminology that isn't confusing or by releasing a glossary of terms, as the wording 'older publication' is incredibly misleading if English is your first language, let alone for anyone who doesn't have English as their native tongue.
  5. Don't worry everyone. Additional FAQ has been released that clears up everything
  6. So basically it's back to running 120 grims 😩🥱
  7. Also, the FAQ above the WD battalions is pretty much RIP to the Forbidden Power armies
  8. I struggle to understand how ghosts, who are meant to cause fear and terror, are uber susceptible to battleshock, even at bravery 10, partly due to squishy heroes being shot off by turn 1 or 2, so no inspiring presence options and partly due to being uber squishy themselves. So many of their army mechanics rely on bravery bombs, yet they can't get higher than -1 without assistance from allies. The command trait Terrifying Entity is just a pure example of WTF rules writing. I would love to see an overhaul to bravery and battleshock, as my main army is meant to use it as a resource for their unique abilities and currently can't.
  9. A bit off topic, but anyone know when the GHB20 FAQ will be out? I thought that it's normally on the Tuesday, after 2 weeks of it's general release date (roughly 17 days). Anyone know the reason why it's not released yet? (And busy with 40k is not an acceptable answer 😂)
  10. Well I've asked the rules team to hopefully get some clarity on the issue, but in the meantime I'll play it as 6+ ward save prevents the ability going off. 😢
  11. So the ward save will stop it happening then?
  12. @Sauriv so having done more research, as well as asking others in my local group, it seems that the Hallowheart FAQ sets the precedent for this. The Hallowheart FAQ mentions mortal wounds suffered and not negated. Because Reik's ability doesn't include 'not negated' he can still use his ward save and potentially heal the wound suffered. I file this situation under 'GW wording confusions'. Using suffered, instead of something like inflicted, leads you to believe that a mortal wound must be suffered and not negated in order for the ability to take effect. But this seems to not be the case.
  13. Yes. Because it's worded 'Roll a dice each time you allocate a wound or mortal wound to friendly, etc.....' Because you allocate the wound, you have to roll.
  14. He needs to suffer the mortal wound. If it gets negated with a ward save then he hasn't suffered the mortal wound. A similar example would be Arkhan the Black's Curse of Years spell. Originally it wasn't FAQ'd that ward saves could stop the amount of dice that rolled, so if you roll three 6s, you then roll 3 dice to fish for the 5s. Then the FAQ change to mortal wounds suffered, so if any of those three 6's that were rolled were saved using ward saves, then you roll less dice, so for example if you rolled three 6s, they save one of them, you only roll two dice to fish for the 5s. The same principle applies here. It's mortal wounds suffered in order to get the casting bonus
  • Create New...