Isotop
-
Posts
372 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Isotop
-
-
On 7/24/2020 at 4:12 PM, RedMax said:
I guess that you have to deploy within 6" (so all point of the bases completly within 6" of table edge).
If objective is 12" of table edge, as said @jamie.white , your deployement will not allow you to be within the 6" of objective, you will be just outside. So except if you can move after (or charge) or have an ability allowing you to make a small move int the objective way, you'll have to wait for your next movement phase to be able to get into the objective (and I guess this is the whole intend of the rule).
On 7/24/2020 at 4:15 PM, jamie.white said:The rules on taking objectives cover this . Remember you have to be within 6 not 6 away . There is a difference . I am not sure if there is an faq covering this though .
You are wrong. "Within 6 inches" includes "6 inches away". Here is the relevant part from the Core Rules:
"[...]So, for example, a unit is within 12" of another unit as long as any model from one unit is 12" or less from any model from the other unit[...]"
(https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Rulesheets/ENG_AoSSW_Rules_booklet_web.pdf, page 2)
On 7/28/2020 at 12:08 PM, Bululu said:i would say yes, 1 miniature can be within 6'' of the objective and the edge, because the 6 belongs to both places there doesnt exist a space that separes both places, its like if you have a ruler 0 -------|------- 12 the | on the middle is 6'' and within 6 let you touch that | and that thing is also within 6'' of the objective, there is no imaginary space that separes that place. The | spot is both within 6'' of the objective and the edge so it is a valid capture and ambush point for 1 minituare to get in. At least that is my opinion.
You are absolutely right about this. Even without the actual rules at hand, you provided an intuitive and elegant explanation to the problem. Another person voting you down without even discussing your argument shows that you left no real room for a counter argument.
On 7/24/2020 at 2:35 PM, Third said:Hi
I'm pretty sure I read a FAQ somewhere on this subject, but now I can't seem to find it..
If I ambush 6" from the table edge, can I capture an objective which is 12" from the table edge? To my knowledge, a single model can "make the distance" 🙂
Your intuition is correct. If an "Ambush" ability states that the unit has to be wholly within 6 inches of the battlefield edge, the following Designers' Commentary clarifies the meaning of it:
"[...]A: A model is wholly within a certain distance if every part of its base is within the stated distance[...]"
(https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/8f9bd00c.pdf, page 3)
In combination with the quotation about "within" above we can see that "wholly within 6 inches of the battlefield edge" means that one point of the models circular base can be exactly 6 inches away from the battlefield edge. Lets put the model on a line with the objective and let the line be perpendicular to the battlefield edge. Since in your example the center of the objective is 12 inches away from the battlefield edge, it means that it is now exatly 6 inches away from the "6 inch point" of the models base we discussed beforehand. Since "exaclty 6 inches away" is included in "within 6 inches", the model is now within "capturing distance" of the objective.
I am sorry that multiple people were trying to tell you that you are wrong and did so without any backup from the rules. We should always be wary when people speak from intuition alone and fail or not even try to connect their statement with the actual rules of the game.
I hope my explanation is clear and that you can make use of this knowledge during your future games.
-
3
-
1
-
-
On 6/25/2020 at 3:59 PM, OkayestDM said:
Shock and Awe only applies if a unit was set up in the Celestial Realm and then deployed on the battlefield later. It only effects a unit that was deployed from the heavens, and only lasts until the end of the turn that unit was deployed.
Could you provide a quote about this? I am pretty sure it is always when a Stormcast unit is set up from reserves. I do not have access to the battletome atm, though.
-
4 hours ago, Melcar said:
So what you're saying is that resolving the attack does not include dealing damage? I guess I take resolve to mean dealing damage also... but that happens in allocation, which is a separate thing handles after resolvement? I that what you mean? I don't think I've actually ever played that way... I think we have allocated wounds after each weapon... Which seems more logical to me... probably why we have always played that way...There is nothing "logical" about the way you played it (at most it is an intuition). Allocating wounds sets in after a units attacks have been resolved - it is super clear from the quotation @EMMachine presented. How are you getting the idea that wounds from different weapons from the same unit would be resolved one after the other?
-
32 minutes ago, Ravinsild said:
.The moment an Ironjawz unit comes within 9'' suddenly they can't make the 1D6'' dice roll move.
I am not sure I understand you here - do you mean Mad as Hell is turned off when the Iron Jaws unit is within 9" of an enemy unit?
The rule does not care about units that the Iron Jaws Unit is within of 9" of. Mad as Hell only cares wether at least one enemy unit is more than 9" away from the Iron Jaws Unit in order to work.
It definitely has to be cleared up by GW to work as intended.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, azdimy said:
Do fleeing models trigger abilities triggering from models being slained?
Core rules states that fleeing models "count as slain"
Does it mean feeing models are just slain models from battleshock or is there a distinction? Because I ve found at least 1 reference in an faq where gw separate fleeing models from slain models it makes me believe that abilities triggering from slain models do not trigger from fleeing models but I ve found my opponents are split on this. The only two abilities where it seems to matter so far are the fec chalice endless spell and the splitting horrors grom the new pink horror warscroll
You should quote the reference you are talking about. Could be of help during the ongoing discussion.
-
1 hour ago, Dead Scribe said:
They updated the faq today.
So a DD-save roll can still only be modified by Rend (not by cover, spell effects, ...)? Does anyone know/assume the reason behind this?
-
31 minutes ago, Phasteon said:
Except nobody in this discussion did that.
I am too scared to be identified as a "shooter" to present a contentual reaction to this. Let us agree to disagree on what sportsmanship is and what moral code is appropriate at the gaming table.
I found the discussion truly interesting, though. I am not a fan of the censorship going on in this forum but I understand that things should not spiral in an ugly direction. I will try to be more...conform next time (I guess).
-
1
-
-
On 2/1/2020 at 6:59 PM, Hounsou83 said:
Hello !
If you retreat from combat in the hero phase ( with a teleport or other abilities)
Do you count as retreated for the purpose of firing , charging ecc
Thanks
Probably not - but maybe you should give us an example of an ability you have in mind.
-
14 hours ago, Kadeton said:
Oof. I think it's a big stretch to say that "No, you cannot use abilities to affect other units while off the board" automatically means "Yes, you can use abilities that don't affect other units while off the board." That's a really dodgy inference. It's pretty typical of GW to clarify only the exact question asked, while failing to elaborate on corollary questions.
I'd suggest talking it over with your opponent, TO, or whatever before the game. Most people will probably be fine to let Drycha do her thing.
Sorry, I might have been a bit unclear.
There is no rule that stops models in reserves from using abilities in the first place. I did not mean to present a false conclusion - the Designer´s Commentary quotation was meant to show that there are indeed restricitons to some abilities (Mercurial Aspect or If I Cannot Rule, None Shall Rule! from Kurdoss are not amongst them).
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Daramiz said:
Endless spells are treated as friendly models by all armies.
I thought "models in the opposing army" meant "models listed in the opponents army list". I guess you interpret it as "enemy models"? I am not sure if and how we can check which way is correct.
-
34 minutes ago, The_Dudemeister said:
- Core book, page 236
If you play without a battleplan, that's the victory condition. However every battleplan has its own victory conditions from holding two objectives to immediately win, to getting the most points untill the end of the fifth turn. In these cases every single round has to be played out even if you have literally nothing to do and you can absolutely still win long after being tabled. Just check what your battleplan says for major victory, because that's what overrides the blank rule.
Fun fact: Endless Spells and their equivalents are models in the opposing army, are they not?
-
1 minute ago, Phasteon said:
1) Because you as the „active“ player gaining something from a misinterpreted rule is worse than taking a „disadvantage“ by not getting something you maybe shouldnt have.
Thats common sense.
I really do not understand how this is common sense. Why is the "active" or "passive" status of the player important? We do not know how the rule will turn out in future Errata/Commentaries, so how could it be an abuse to play the rule one way or another? Why is it important "in which army" the unclear rule is located?
-
10 minutes ago, novembermike said:
These are pretty basic game concepts so if you're having trouble understanding I can give you a few pointers, but GW doesn't tend to define their terms pretty well. Do you have the rules quote for what an inch or a foot is?
An inch is a perfectly defined concept. Your "look backs" and "replacement effects" are terms made up by you. I think it is pretty clear that these are subjective concepts that do not exist in AoS rules as general constructs.
EDIT: It is absolutely fine to use new terms to describe how you might understand a certain ruling, but please do not act as if "look backs" and "replacement effects" are some objective rules facts. Just explain a bit more and others might be able to follow your argumentation and react in a sensible way.
-
On 2/3/2020 at 2:58 AM, Keith said:
If Drycha starts off the table hidden , can you declare that she is enraged or embittered ?
I say yeah ? as she is never neither , she must be enraged or embittered ?
Sorry for the late answer. Yes, you can use Mercurial Aspect when Drycha is in reserves:
"Q: Can models set up in reserve (in the Celestial Realm, for example) cast spells, or use abilities or command abilities to affect other units? A: No. Only models deployed on the battlefield can cast spells, or use abilities or command abilities to affect other units."
(https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/8f9bd00c.pdf, page 4)
As you can see, wether you can or can not use an ability from "outside" the table depends on wether it affects other units. Mercurial Aspect does not damage or otherwise influence another unit in any way, so you are fine to use it.
Also remember: You have to declare the Mercurial Aspect mode before your opponent and you roll off for initiative (start of the battle round).
-
25 minutes ago, novembermike said:
Nah, "Counts As" works for look backs. All dice rolls are look backs, you roll the dice and then look back at it to see how to resolve an event. "Counts as" works fine there. The Horror split is a replacement ability. It looks for a specific event (a model being slain) and then replaces the effect (instead of removing the model you remove the model and add in other models). Replacement effects can't be look backs because they have to happen when the event occurs.
You are literally making this up. As nice as it sounds, there is no foundation for your explanation in the rules. I wish they were more clear on a lot of things, but they are not. Let us just wait and hope for a better Erratum/Commentary.
-
1 hour ago, Phasteon said:
Thats why I make the point that its on the players in this case to be a good sport and interpret the rules in a way that makes for a fun and fair game experience for both players.
I really do not get why the player with the unclear rule should be the one who has to step back. By interpreting the rule in question "mildly" their opponent gets an advantage as well - why would the advantage be less unfair in this case? Why not simply roll off when a rule is simply not clear?
1 hour ago, Phasteon said:Edit: Even worse, there are people that build a ONETRICK list that just consists of abusing that questionable rule. I have no words for that tbh.
I understand: You have been touched by some very bad people. But do not generalize. Not every person who want to play with clear and detailed rules is also an immoral human being.
-
27 minutes ago, Kasper said:
Is it annoying though? I'd imagine its better than too much room for it to move around. 18 EUR seems like a nice price compared to the stuff I've found so far.
It fits pretty much perfectly, but it is hard to insert the box into the bag (I did need help from a second person) since it opens to just one side. Any smaller and it might not fit in at all.
-
2 hours ago, Kasper said:
@IsotopThat's actually not a bad idea! Whats the name of it? I'd like to compare the price with stuff around here.
I found it here:
Just make sure that the dimensions are not smaller than the ones I provided. The Ikea box fits really tightly into it.
-
4 hours ago, gronnelg said:
Your certainly right that we have to consider more than start and finish. The actually movement is also essential.
So here's how I see it:
We have to move Nagash onto the building, and then far enough forward so that we can tilt his base into a vertical postion. Let's say the midpoint of his base. Then we tilt him forward to a vertical position. We now used all of the 9" movement. But since Nagash is a flyer, he can ignore vertical movement. So now we slide him downwards along the building wall, until he is within 0,5" of the clanrats. Seen from above this would be a 9" move. For a non-flying unit, we would also have to consider vertical movement, bringing this to more than 9". But since a flyer ignores vertical movement, this is still a 9" move, as seen from straight above. Am I missing something?
This would be still 15" of movement, would it not?
Same scenario as before (if this was not clear, this is a representation from the side):
Yellow = Nagash (we assume 6" base)
Pink dot = a fixed point within Nagash´s base
Red = enemy model Nagash wants to charge
Grey= structure in the way (Nagash has to "stick" to the wall at the end of the movement)
1,2,3= Nagash´s positions after different parts of his charge move
You want to "move Nagash onto the building, and then far enough forward so that we can tilt his base into a vertical postion". You want to move him with half his base overlapping onto the structure. This is represented in the movement from position 1 to position 2. As you can see, Nagash allready moved 12" (9" + half of his base size (6"/2)) at this point. Then the pink dot moves further 3" (against half of Nagash´s base) horizontally by rotating the base 90° around its center - this way we get from position 2 to position 3. The final position (not presented in the graphic) will be reached by "gliding" down the wall, which is free because it only consists of vertical movement and Nagash flies.
Am I missing something here?
-
3 hours ago, SoSoCho said:
Or wait.
eg he needs a 3+ and rolls a 3.
It gets modified by -1 so its a 2 instead and fails to wound.
So that is actually a bad thing for me ? If he rolls 3 and needs 2+ (due to -1 ) then he does not fail ? I am not sure I understand hehe
You have to understand the difference between a Characteristic and a Roll. Characteristics are values printed on the warscrolls of units and tell you about the properties of the unit (Movement, Wounds, Save, Bravery) and their weapons (Range, Attacks, To Hit, To Wound, Rend, Damage). With the words of the Core Rules:
"Warscrolls include a set of characteristics that are referred to in the core game rules and which determine how the model can be used in the game. For example, a model’s Save characteristic determines what you must roll in order to make a save roll, a weapon’s Attacks characteristic determines how many hit rolls are made for it, and so on."
(https://ageofsigmar.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/06/AoS_Rules-ENG.pdf, page 13)
A Roll on the other hand is the result of the physical act of rolling a die/rolling dice. Imagine rolling a die to hit with a weapon of a model of yours. The die stops moving and shows the 3 (or three dots or whatever symbols the die uses) on the top side. We call this a roll of a 3. At this point we would normally compare this roll (3) with the To-Hit-characteristic of the weapon you attacked with. If the roll is equal or higher than the characteristic, the roll is successful and (in our example) scores a hit.
Effects like the Hermdar command trait that modify rolls are applied between the steps "rolling die/dice" and "comparing the roll to the characteristic". The command trait in questions lowers the To-Wound-rolls of enemy models against certain models of yours by 1. Since their To-Wound-rolls have to be equal or higher than their To-Wound-characteristic, having the result of their rolls lowered is a bad thing for them. Here is a practical example:
An enemy model´s weapon has a To-Wound-characteristic of 3+ (we assume they allready hit your unit with a single attack). Your opponent rolls a die to check wether they wound your unit or not. Your opponent rolls a 3. Normally, this would be enough to succeed (a roll of 3 is equal or higher than the To-Wound-characteristic of 3+), but your unit is wholly within 12" of your Hermdar general. Therefore, you have to substract 1 from the To-Wound-roll of your opponents model. Their roll of a 3 is changed into a roll of a 2. This final result is no longer equal or higher than their To-Wound-characteristic of 3+ and the attack fails.
(see https://ageofsigmar.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/06/AoS_Rules-ENG.pdf, p.7 under MAKING ATTACKS)
I hope this explanation proves to be helpful to you. If you have any other questions (I assume you are new to AoS and still learning), feel free to ask. There are no stupid questions, especially not about convoluted GW rules.
-
2
-
-
On 1/20/2020 at 3:07 PM, Kasper said:
It must be some huge cookie box to fit all the units. 😁
I went ahead and bought this from IKEA at around 25 USD - Significantly less than those from Magna Rack etc.
It is made of metal and it got sliders with cork on - I decided to peel the cork off (gave me more stuff for my bases!) and the dudes fit right on.
If you remove the bottom 2 sliders, a Maw Krusha can easily fit in there together with other characters/Gore Gruntas and then Ardboyz can fit in the two top rooms.
I'm considering drilling two holes in the top and fit some kind of handle.
This is the kind of bag it fits in:
This particular one is from Germany, but I guess there will be similar bags (it is for overlock sewing machines) available where you live. The measurements are 33cm height, 35,5cm lenght, 26,5cm depth (external dimensions).
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, gronnelg said:
Any unit can "stand" on vertical surfaces (even if the physical model can't). So there should be no problem with Nagash ending his move in position 3 in @Isotopdrawing. And since flying ignores vertical distance, then the pink dot would be within 9" of it's original position, which would be a successful charge in that case. Right?
I do not think that the movement rules work this way, and here is why: You basically say that we have to compare the pink dot at the starting position to the pink dot at the end position of the move only. But if this was the case, models could move as far as they want during their movement as long as they end the movement within their Movement Characteristic from the starting point. I hope this argument is comprehensible .
-
I have got a pretty straightforward question: Is there any rule that stops the players from tilting a model to the point of laying it on its side? Here is a quick sketch to demonstrate what I was thinking about:
I guess we all agree that A and B are valid positions for the grey model in relation to the playing ground. C seems weird at first glance, but my question boils down to this: Is there, ruleswise, any difference between B and C and what makes each position in itself a valid or invalid one?
-
3 hours ago, Kasper said:
But now you are ignoring key mechanics of fly. You are measuing vertical distance and taking into account that the terrain is there, both of which the core rules specially state you ignore when making a move.
I tried to simplify the situation, resulting in this (sorry for my drawing skills/tools) graphic:
Yellow = Nagash (we assume 6" base)
Pink dot = a fixed point within Nagash´s base
Red = enemy model Nagash wants to charge
Grey= structure in the way (Nagash has to "stick" to the wall at the end of the movement)
1,2,3= Nagash´s positions after different parts of his charge move
We assume the distance between Nagash (1) and the enemy model is 9,5" and the distance to get from 1 to 2 is 9".
Position 2 is "inside" of the structure since we can ignore it during the flying charge move. So, the first part is pretty simple: Nagash has to move 9" to get from Position 1 to Position 2. The weird thing (in my view) happens now. Nagash has to be tipped up the wall since he can not end his charge move inside of the structure. Here is where the pink dot on his base comes into play. To get from Position 2 to Position 3, the pink dot part of Nagash´s base moves 6" (only horizontal movement because of flying), does it not? Therefore Nagash would have to move 15" in total to reach his final destination: 9" straight movement from Position 1 to Position 2 plus 6" rotating into Position 3.
You have to apply the movement rules (furthest point of the base/model moved) to every part of a movement, do you not? If yes, I assume that the explanation above is correct, but I might be missing something. This procedure does seem a bit weird, so feel free to chip away at my understanding.
AoS 3 New Rules Discussion
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted · Edited by Isotop
The answer is correct and it worked like this all of 2.0 too. One point of the models base can be exactly 6" away from the edge of the battlefield (and therefore within 6" of the edge). The same point can be exactly 6" away from the objective marker (and therefore within 6" of it). You have to remember that being exacly x from something means you are within x of that something.
EDIT: here is a link to an older discussion about the topic. I guess Aos 3 did not change the relevant rules used there (do not have the rules at hand atm). I hope this helps.