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

Cynric

Members
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13 Prosecutor

About Cynric

  • Rank
    Judicator
  1. I am hoping that the new terrain is an additional wildwood model rather than a scraping of the existing ones. Only three base models of trees is rather lame and more variety for the modeling is welcome. Perhaps put the new grove on a smaller base to allow more placement options. If I was going to shoot for the moon I would also wish for the existing placement rules to be relaxed to remove the "distance from" clauses and instead just require that models not need pushed aside to deploy the woods. The original rules I think were conceived in an era when tables were less cluttered.
  2. For me hours spent painting greatly exceed hours spent moving models on the table. I would go with what I wanted to paint and let the chips fall where they may when it is time to game.
  3. It does not have to be either or. I loved my old wood elves which blended beasts, trees and elves. I could skew the blend one way or another as suited my mood and the variety was much more fun to paint than an endless queue of archers. The ideal outcome for me would be a tome that brought back the wardancer/eagles/forest dragon and allowed for wander centered forces while also allowing (perhaps through battalions) for combined sylvaneth/wanderer forces. To make allied sylvaneth practical the battalion would need to solve the wildwood summoning problem.
  4. It is interesting that you read setting up "to the side" in a very different way than I do. I always took it to mean put them somewhere other than in play but in a place that your opponent can see them and know what is lurking about. The deploying on the edge imo has nothing to do with where the models were put aside.
  5. You could always allie a dragonlord and ask your opponent to allow a forest dragon as a proxy.
  6. English is my first language and what exactly they mean is not clear to me either. To me it is not clear how spending points on a sylvaneth battalion is different than spending on a treelord; I don't see why they would come from a different pool. My guess is the bit from the errata is talking about situations such as a wanderers alliegence army that decides to bring a sylvaneth household battalion. The units in the household would of course come from allies as they are not wanderers. They also might have been talking about battalions that include non native units such as winterleafs 0-1 order unit although that is even less clear and it would I think make the guardians of allariel battalion unworkable as it would require either really high points or force the army to be generic order. That battalion requires 460 points of stormcast with units a minimum size. That said the sylvaneth book has a battalion called sylvaneth war grove which requires something like 9 battalions as members (1 lords of clan, 3 household, 3 forest folk, 1 outcasts and 1 free spirits.) I cant imagine how silly that game would be or how many points would be required to put it on the table so perhaps the rule writers are imagining situations of a scale far beyond the games I play.
  7. I am constantly suprised by rules that I did not know existed so I am not doubting you, but I would like to know where it says battalions are paid for in allies. What if we simplify it and lose the freecity (can add that back later after rules are more clear), and create an order army that is 50% one faction and 50% another faction (wanderers and sylvaneth in this case), wouldnt the battalion just be paid for with normal points just like the sylvaneth units that are wrapped within it?
  8. It seems like a half implemented feature. For example freecity has no artifacts or command abilities so although they give you an allegiance ability you still need another allegiance to get the other two. To my thinking it's closer to being a battalion than an allegiance or I suppose it could be thought of as dual citizenship.
  9. I am confused too. The warscroll battalions in the sylvaneth book do not have keywords. But even if they did have a keyword "sylvaneth" that would still be native to the living city so use of allie points on the battalion does not seem right.
  10. Ok, so to clarify the scheme... the dryads, branchwraiths and battalions still leaves a lot of points for the rest of the army. That rest of the army would mostly be wanderer, with a TLA or possibly a treeman and the allies points would grab two units from wood elves compendium (forest dragon and an eagle for example or wardancers and waywatcher unit or avatar of hunt and hounds, lots of choices). This would force "generic order" which then leaves the dryads without a method to get wildwoods on the table. Hence the interest in the harvestboon item that lets a wraith cast verdant blessing. Combined with a TLA and it might work... it's not going to win tournaments but that is not the intent... the goal is to bring an oldschool army without it being grossly handicapped.
  11. Thanks for the reply. The "other points to taste" would be wanders with 2 units from the woodelves compendium drug in under allies (as they are order and thus allowed) so it's far from sylvaneth allegiance. Wish it could be sylvaneth and have more than a token wanderer allie as their spell lore/special rules/wildwood before setup/artifacts are all better than generic order. Mostly this is a scheme to put something that looks like the old wood elf army back on the table. This scheme seems to provide a way to put wildwoods on the table at a fairly low cost as the dryads pay the battleline tax and branchwraiths are a bit of a bargin and harvestboon is pretty good on its own merits.
  12. Is it permissible to bring a battalion within a living city? I do not see anywhere it is written that you have to for example be sylvaneth allegiance to bring a sylvaneth battalion, did I miss something? Here is what I am thinking. Allegiance: order / living city / realm to taste for artifacts that are not trash. 3x Dryads 2x branchwraith Forest folk Harvestboon Rest of points to taste... Per harvestboon one of the wraiths can take tear of grace as an artifact which grants an additional spell that is selected from the deep wood spell lore. That spell would be verdant blessing of course solving the wildwood problem. Is this legal/did I miss something?
  13. I think you are right. The faq/errata completely rewrites the rules. The battleline seems like it will need to come from one of the freecity resident lists and cant be a "battleline if" which can make this option less atttractive.
  14. Please disregard this post. The faq/errata completely rewrote the applicable rules/examples. Post retained for history.... I find it quite confusing. I generally avoid confusing things as it is best for tranquility and happiness with friends, but since the question is on the table I'll comment... Firestorm page 55, has an example of a city team that says if all stormcast you could be either stormcast or order alliegence, but if stormcast and freepeoples you gotta be order. So if all wanders, I think you could be wanders allegiance (presumably with battalion) and gain a deployment option. Similarly you could be all sylvaneth and gain a deployment option. But here is where my head hurts, what if you are wanders with normal wanders allie (within normal limits) cand you still be living city? Further, what if you are sylvaneth with wanders allie (within normal constraints), it seems like you could have all the sylvaneth army abilities, spells, artifacts, battalions and also call it living city and deploy out of woods/any border with a set aside wanderer unit and of course being unable to give artifacts to the within city allie. Alternatively you could go order and pick your allie team from anything in order. All this said, edge cases arent the greatest thing for keeping friends.
  15. Sure, but that seems unlikely. What I would like functionally is a mixed (either native or higher allie allowance) wanderer/sylvaneth force with reliable ways to put wildwoods on the table. Without the woods the sylvaneth models are overpriced imo. This could be done through a battalion or spell lore added to either army. Also it would be nice if the woods themselves, spells and command abilities that affect either wanderers or sylvaneth work on the entire battalion rather than just a portion. From the point of view of just "winning games" going mixed seems much worse than going sylvaneth with an allied waywatcher and glade guard (and some kurnoth archers if yet more archery is desired.) This would only solve 2/3 of getting back to the army of old as orion, forest dragon, wardancers, eagles and beasttenders are left to the bygone era.
×
×
  • Create New...