Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Nogginnocker's Achievements


Prosecutor (3/10)



  1. Wow. Now that is quite cheeky! Thanks for the tip. I love it.
  2. Am I missing something here? How are you casting three mystic shields in a single turn? Edit: oh. Staff of Spirits. Never noticed that before. Holy ******. I really need to get Arkhan. Thanks!
  3. Really excellent write-up. Thank you for this! One correction though, “Wound characteristic” is not the same as “remaining wounds.” It refers to the maximum number of wounds on the warscroll. This is the same mechanic as the Megaboss ability “strength from victory” for Ironjawz.
  4. Some portions of this thread are starting to reach DakkaDakka levels of intense disagreement. 😲 Just because I was bored and curious, I started looking at the FAQs in other languages. The Spanish mirrored the English, but the German was slightly different. *Ooooh Intrigue!!!!!* I'm busting out the tinfoil hat and Jiffy Pop for this. Here's the German: Seite 69 – Kampfeigenschaften, Meister des Schicksals Ersetze den letzten Absatz durch das Folgende: „Jeder ausgegebene Schicksalswürfel ermöglicht dir, einen einzelnen Würfel zu ersetzen. Wenn du einen Wurf mit 2W6 ersetzen möchtest (etwa einen Zauberwurf oder Angriffswurf), musst du 2 Schicksalswürfel ausgeben. Ersetzte Würfe zählen als unmodifizierte Würfe und können nicht wiederholt und nicht weiter modifiziert werden. Wenn du einen Schicksalswürfel ausgibst, um einen Schutzwurf zu ersetzen, wird das Ergebnis des Schicksalswürfels wie üblich durch den Wuchtwert der Attacke modifiziert. Wenn du einen Schicksalswürfel ausgibst, um einen Kampfschocktest zu ersetzen, wird das Ergebnis des Schicksalswürfels wie üblich durch die Anzahl der aus der Einheit getöteten Modelle modifiziert. Now, I am no German linguist (alas, there is no Korean language FAQ). However, I faithfully put my trust into the almighty Google Translate because I'm a 21st Century Digital Boy (minus the illiteracy bit), and this is the result: "Page 69 - Combat characteristics, master of destiny Replace the last paragraph with the following: “Each fate die you spend allows you to replace a single die. If you have a litter want to replace with 2d6 (like a magic throw or attack roll), you must spend 2 dice of fate. Replaced throws count as unmodified throws and cannot be repeated or modified. If you spend a die of fate, around one to replace the save throw, the result of the fate die is modified as usual by the balance value of the attack. If you spend a die of fate, around one replacing combat shock test will be the result of Destiny Cube as usual by the number of modified the unit killed models." I noticed that it left out the somewhat awkward parenthesis in the English FAQ that seems to have unwittingly caused confusion "(with the exception of save rolls and battleshock tests)." If there's a massive failure in the Google translation, I'm sure someone fluent in German can point it out quickly enough. I'm not a tournament player. I only play for fun in my basement, my friends' basements, or my FLGS. I have some local friends who either currently play Tzeentch demons or are currently building a Tzeentch demon list. I know I'll let them use a DD of 1 in the casual games we play because I think maybe GW went a tad too far on some of the errata and I feel kind of bad. Also, I'll just look at it as much deserved flagellation for failing to kill a mere 10 pinks or even 20 pinks in some situations. Also, I can sometimes pick out the banner bearer specifically, so it may not even matter. However, if I ever did plan on going to a tournament in the near future before GW answers this question, I would simply ask the TO and call it a day. It's that simple. Regardless of the outcome, I will henceforth refer to DD as "Destiny Cubes."
  5. I agree with this 100%. Honestly, I'm not fully convinced that they intended to negate using a DD of 1 to invoke the warscroll ability of Pink Horrors if there's still a banner bearer on the table. However, RAW, it still seems fairly clear to me. At least, in the English version of the FAQ. You know, I'd be really curious to see the other translations' takes on the new FAQ are. It might provide some insight. At any rate, I sincerely thank you for this far more elaborate explanation. It helped me see the thinking behind the other side's interpretation. Again, my comments were dealing strictly with RAW and not RAI here. At the end of the day, I highly recommend any Tzeentch players who intend to attend any tournament first contact the TO and see their ruling (barring any pending future clarification of the FAQ) before blowing a gasket at the tournament if a TO decides to play by RAW. This should help you mentally prepare ahead of time. As for me, this is a moot issue because I play Nighthaunt and my list is easily capable of taking out 10 or 20 pinks in a turn. I also have multiple methods of targeting the specific banner bearer. So, it's no skin off my back. I've just been observing this back and forth from the sidelines and decided to provide my measly two cents' worth. Thank you for your time and further explanation, Inquisitorsz! That was kind of of you.
  6. I've read this over in my head several times and, for the life of me, I simply can't understand how you came to your conclusion. It's in black and white. They laid out their case of what counts as unmodified regarding the use of destiny dice. Then, they clearly made an exception to the list of "unmodified" by specifically calling out save rolls and battleshock tests. Ergo, they are absolutely not considered to be "unmodified." So, by default they are considered to be "modified" (unless I'm ignorant of a third status - "not modified, but also not unmodified"??). To be clear, I do not know what the actual intent of the rules writers was, nor do other people who claim they do. I'm just focusing on the actual language in the FAQ. For all I know, they flubbed it and made an unintentional mistake. If that's the case, they should really hot fix the FAQ. Furthermore, the community seems to be focusing on the text of the "masters of destiny" while willfully ignoring the immediately preceding portion, which specifically calls out how frustrating Pink Horrors were becoming to opponents in the meta. To quote, "Designer’s Note – Destiny Dice and Changehost: While the intention of ‘unmodified’ Destiny Dice was to control unruly casting rolls and other exploits that were identified during testing, and an attempt to keep the Destiny Dice mechanic as straightforward and interpretation-free as possible, we unfortunately did not foresee the consequences this change would have on battleshock and save rolls, especially with regards to units like Pink Horrors, which can tie up enemy units in frustrating ways. This is also contributed to the Changehost becoming an incredibly powerful warscroll battalion in very short order. However, with the help of our dedicated and passionate community, we have adjusted both how Destiny Dice and the Changehost work to achieve their original intent. The Age of Sigmar team deeply thanks each and every one of you for your feedback, and we look forward to continuing to develop our beloved game with all of you together." I'm curious if the rules designers wanted to see Tzeentch players be forced to make an interesting decision on whether or not to roll on battleshock in order to get that lucky 1 for the banner like the players of other Chaos armies have to do. I think it adds a bit of spice to the game. It's an interesting thing to see a Tzeentch player have to squirm in taking a chance on an actual dice roll in a critical situation when they're apparently so used to simply knowing the outcome ahead of time via DD.
  7. At the very least, GW needs to address the question about DD and BS in the two week FAQ regardless of their answer so that it’s beyond questionable and players won’t have that nagging doubt in the back of their heads, “is this really what they intended?” A simple yes or no will suffice.
  8. Oh yeah. I get it. It’s also the same way that Tzeentch players try to justify their book’s current power level. “Just kill the characters.” Wow. So easily said. So, when I hear “better unit placement” and the battle took place on two of the objectives, which we were playing shifting objectives, I guess the way for me to not die is to not go for the objectives, which he was already camping with multiple units of pinks. I guess that’s how you win then. Don’t go to the objectives. Oh and be sure to spread your heroes far away from each other because we all know how nighthaunt doesn’t rely on buffs or anything. What an amazing ability to have for a whopping 50 pts. If I could give up my first turn CP to make my opponent spread out completely, keep their heroes away from the action, and not go for the objectives in an objective based game, I would take that in a heartbeat.
  9. I know. I posted a few back that I made a list and beat my friend’s duplicitous. It was a wonky and sometimes janky list, but I barely pulled it off nonetheless, albeit with help from a crucial double turn. I would like to say that I can personally testify to the overwhelming and brutally shocking power of a darkfire daemonrift. After my opponent conceded, i asked him to talk out how he would’ve used the endless spell if he got to go first on turn two instead of me. He teleported two wizard units, cast an endless spell, then cast darkfire daemonrift in a way that clipped six of my units, one of which was a wizard. He ended up dealing about 50 mortal wounds. Killed two characters, and four other units. He melted 830 points in my army for one cast of a 50 pts endless spell. And at the end? He plucked it away with his LoC. And you know what? It was easy. So, when I try to explain these things on the forums from my direct personal experience, and then everyone tries to theorycraft their way out of it using hypotheticals without having faced it themselves, I just roll my eyes and say, “cool story, bro. You do you.”
  10. Oh I know. There are multiple threads all over the place railing against the book in its current form. It also took 1st, 2nd AND 3rd at the GT heat #1 IIRC. I’m just reading those threads while eating popcorn, cackling maniacally and occasionally muttering “I told you so” with a thousand yard stare on my face.
  11. Well, it finally happened. I just played against my friend's Hosts Duplicitous list by my request (he offered to play a different build). He's a really good AoS player, so he knows exactly what he's doing. We played shifting objectives with realm rules, realm spells, and all terrain features. I told him exactly how I intended to play my army because we're friends. So, he knew how to counter it, which he promptly proceeded to do. Somehow, he conceded after the top of round 2. It blew my mind. I need to test this list a few more times before I post the actual list itself. It is a bit wonky, and I've never seen anything like it before. I'm kind of proud of it myself. I'm not even worried about Eternal Conflagration as it would get devastated by my list. I really want to test it against a Petrifex Elite OBR list, though, as I designed the list to specifically be able to take on all three builds while holding its own against several other armies. Unfortunately, no one in my area plays OBR at the moment, although one player has considered switching from Skaven to OBR.
  12. I was also giving some serious consideration to bringing a few units of Chainghasts to potentially deep strike and shoot snipe a smaller wound character as well. It's important to remember that Tzeentch's Locus of Change only applies to your melee weapons. However, that would be rather points intensive. Still, I will be brainstorming and theory crafting potential tailored lists (which makes me feel dirty, but is necessary) over the next week or two.
  13. Ha! What a brilliant idea. To answer your question, the banners are absolutely necessary to take out. I was thinking of using a Dreadblade harrows equipped with Slitter. But your idea is even better. But of course, "Por que no los dos?!" I think I'll do that combination together. And this is why I outsource ideas to the internet! The more I've talked with you guys and others, the more my mind has been racing. I'll still have to redo my army and completely change the approach to how I play versus Tzeentch in particular, but it will be worth it in the long run. For some reason, I had remembered incorrectly that Reikenour's corpse candle dealt a wound to an enemy unit. But lo and behold! It sure does say model. Great stuff! Thanks to many of you for cheering me up slightly. I still doubt I can win, but doing that a few times will help mitigate the soul crushing losses.
  14. I almost always play 2,000 pts games unless we're doing some sort of narrative event.
  15. Apologies for an incoming wall of text... Yeah. DG is normally amazing. I had so much fun playing with it, even if I lost, because it made the game more enjoyable. Then the new Tzeentch book came out, and boy it is a doozy. DG’s strength relies on getting a good buff from your hexwraiths when they charge. Against The Hosts Duplicitous, you are not allowed to retreat. DG’s other selling point is that it made Olynder stay on the board much longer than previously. She would commonly be shot or magicked off on T1 or T2. DG makes it much more difficult to remove her. Her Command ability is really good for bringing back multiple hexwraiths. Being able to retreat with one unit of 10 hexwraiths, potentially dealing some flyover damage in the process, followed by another unit charging to replace them used to work really well. Now, your hexwraiths are looking at base -1 to hit against Tzeentch demons with a hero wholly within 12”. Then, a competent Tzeentch general will cast Geminids to apply another -1 to hit. Then, if they know you have an ability that gives +1 to hit (i.e. KoS on foot), they can cast “Arcane Suggestion” with the Gaunt Summoner. Admittedly, most Tzeentch players choose “Glimpse the Future” or “Bolt of Tzeentch” as the spell lore for the GS. Although the LoC could choose “Treason of Tzeentch” for the potential -1 to hit, I think most Tzeentch generals would take either “Tzeentch’s firestorm” or “Fold Reality” instead. You have to be insanely lucky to successfully cast Olynder’s Grief Stricken spell, which would help to mitigate the multiple minuses to hit for your hexwraiths. However, The Hosts Duplicitous wizards get to reroll failed casting and unbinding rolls. A competent general would save an unbind for their LoC to fish for at least one five or six on the four dice they get to roll if you even manage to cast it in the first, which seemingly rarely goes off for me. Alternatively, they can take chance completely out of the equation and just use two fate dice. LoCs also have a warscroll command ability giving all wizards +1 to casting and unbinding rolls as long as they are wholly within 18”. The command ability is stackable and lasts until their next hero phase. Olynder’s bravery-based shooting ability is terrible against demons and I tend to roll a one when I use “Lifting the Veil.” That’s just bad luck for, although my bad luck is quite reliable. However, results may vary, LOL. So, the only reason I have left to use Olynder would be for her amazing command ability. When hexwraiths are hitting like pillows, it’s not worth it. Plus, it uses the CP that you could be using to summon the hexwraiths back to her side to get them out of the “no retreating trap” that comes with fighting against Hosts Duplicitous. So, yeah. It basically comes down to me simply having to completely redo my entire army concept when fighting against that Tzeentch build, which is rapidly gaining popularity in my local meta. That’s why I ranted last night. It is what it is. I just needed to vent is all.
  • Create New...